LAUSR

PurposeTheoretical innovation has been central to the study of red tape in (public sector) organizations. However, fundamental red tape concepts have failed to capture fully the lived experience of dysfunctional rules. This study addresses this issue.Design/methodology/approachThe study provides a critical review of existing red tape theory, highlighting its strengths but, more importantly, its limitations for analyzing red tape from an experiential perspective. To develop an experiential approach, the author draws on philosopher Martin Heidegger’s analysis of (dysfunctional) equipment, leveraging his insights to provide a cognitive account of established red tape concepts including functional efficacy, compliance burden, goal displacement and the bureaucratic personality.FindingsThe analysis suggests that, from an experiential perspective, impersonal organizational goals are unlikely to serve as the criteria by which evaluations of rule quality are made. Rather, a limited horizon of practical objectives, grounded in the individual work context, provides a more realistic standard. The practical implications of this insight for research in several areas are discussed.Originality/valueBy drawing on a literature largely overlooked by public administration scholars, this study contributes to the theory of red tape and organizational rules by providing a novel perspective that is not entirely discontinuous with existing work.