Background: The background and objectives of the research revolve around bureaucracy as a classic form of the modern division of labor, with Max Weber acknowledging its inevitability. However, the objective implications of the bureaucracy’s iron cage are evident in governance and management experiences. The mayors of Tehran’s districts exemplify how Iranian culture interacts with bureaucracy. This research seeks to establish principles and governance for district governors using an alternative bureaucracy, parallel to conventional bureaucracy. Methods: The methods employed include twenty strategically selected interviews, considering age, municipal area, and work experience for maximum variance. Grounded theory methodology, specifically the approach by Anselm Strauss and Barney Glaser, guides the research, employing open coding, axial coding, and selective coding. MaxQDA 2020 software enhances the qualitative data analysis, facilitating organization, coding, and collaboration within the research team. Results: Findings indicate “inevitable violations” as a common starting point for interviewees, leading to three axes: “preconditions,” “objectives,” and “strategies and mechanisms” of alternative bureaucracy. In conclusion, breaking through bureaucracy becomes necessary for governors to act. Alternative bureaucracy, rooted in experience yet considering the bureaucratic field, requires transcendent goals. Hybridity and ethical principles are crucial when transitioning from conventional bureaucracy to the alternative in urban governance.

1. Applbaum, A. I. (2019). Legitimacy without Illusions: The Right to Govern in a Wanton World. Harvard University Press.
2. Ahluwalia, I. J. (2019). Urban governance in India. Journal of Urban Affairs, 41(1), 83-102. https://doi.org/10.1080/07352166.2016.1271614
3. Baud, I., Jameson, S., Peyroux, E., & Scott, D. (2021). The urban governance configuration: A conceptual framework for understanding complexity and enhancing transitions to greater sustainability in cities. Geography Compass, 15(5), e12562. https://doi.org/10.1111/gec3.12562
4. Bixler, R. P., Atshan, S., Banner, J. L., et al. (2019). Assessing integrated sustainability research: Use of social network analysis to evaluate scientific integration and transdisciplinarity in research networks. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 39, 103-113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2019.08.001
5. Bixler, R. P., Lieberknecht, K., Atshan, S., et al. (2020). Reframing urban governance for resilience implementation: The role of network closure and other insights from a network approach. Cities, 103, 102726. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2020.102726
6. Bonatti, M., Bayer, S., Pope, K., et al. (2023). Assessing the effectiveness and justice of protected areas governance: Issues and situated pathways to environmental policies in Río Negro National Park, Paraguay. Social Sciences, 12(2), 71. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci12020071
7. Borcan O., Olsson O., Putterman L. (2018). State history and economic development: Evidence from six millennia. Journal of Economic Growth, 23, 1–40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10887-017-9152-0
8. Bragaglia, F. (2021). Social innovation as a ‘magic concept’ for policy-makers and its implications for urban governance. Planning Theory, 20(2), 102-120. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473095220934832
9. Broto, V. C. (2017). Urban governance and the politics of climate change. World development, 93, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2016.12.031
10. Cavada, M., Tight, M. R., & Rogers, C. D. (2019). A smart city case study of Singapore—Is Singapore truly smart? In: Smart city emergence. Elsevier. pp. 295-314. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-816169-2.00014-6
11. Coaffee, J., Healey, P. (2003). ‘My voice: My place’: Tracking transformations in urban governance. Urban studies, 40(10), 1979-1999. https://doi.org/10.1080/0042098032000116077
12. Cochrane, G. (2018). Max Weber’s vision for bureaucracy. Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-62289-7
13. Coppedge, M., Gerring, J., Knutsen, C. H., et al. (2019). V-Dem Codebook v9. varieties of democracy (V-Dem) project. Available online: https://www.v-dem.net/static/website/img/refs/codebookv111.pdf (accessed on 4 March 2023).
14. Corodescu-Roșca, E., Hamdouch, A., & Iațu, C. (2023). Innovation in urban governance and economic resilience. The case of two Romanian regional metropolises: Timișoara and Cluj Napoca. Cities, 132, 104090. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2022.104090
15. Dahlström C., Lapuente V. (2017). Organizing Leviathan: Politicians, bureaucrats and the making of good government. Cambridge University Press.
16. De Guimarães, J. C. F., Severo, E. A., Júnior, L. A. F., et al. (2020). Governance and quality of life in smart cities: Towards sustainable development goals. Journal of Cleaner Production, 253, 119926. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119926
17. Glaser, B. G. (1992). Basics of grounded theory analysis: Emergence vs forcing. Available online: https://cir.nii.ac.jp/crid/1130000797903931008 (accessed on 4 March 2023).
18. Guo, L. H., Cheng, S., Liu, J., et al. (2022). Does social perception data express the spatio-temporal pattern of perceived urban noise? A case study based on 3,137 noise complaints in Fuzhou, China. Applied Acoustics, 201, 109129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apacoust.2022.109129
19. Hamdouch, A., & Galvan, A. (2019). Social innovation as a driver of urban transformation? The case of planning approaches in the Dominican Republic. Urban Planning, 4(1), 31-43. https://doi.org/10.17645/up.v4i1.1740
20. Hendriks, F. (2014). Understanding good urban governance: Essentials, shifts, and values. Urban Affairs Review, 50(4), 553-576. https://doi.org/10.1177/1078087413511782
21. Martí-Costa, M., Blanco, I., Parés, M., & Subirats, J. (2016). Urban regeneration and governance. How to evaluate participation in a governance network? Three theoretical perspectives and a case study (Spanish). In: Participación, políticas públicas y territorio. Ediciones UNGS. pp. 27-52.
22. Lukas, M. (2019). Urban governance. In: The Wiley Blackwell encyclopedia of urban and regional studies. Anthony Orum. pp. 1-11.
23. Hui, C. X., Dan, G., Alamri, S., Toghraie, D. (2023). Greening smart cities: An investigation of the integration of urban natural resources and smart city technologies for promoting environmental sustainability. Sustainable Cities and Society, 99, 104985. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2023.104985
24. Jiang, H., Geertman, S., Witte, P. (2022). Smart urban governance: An alternative to technocratic “smartness”. GeoJournal, 87(3), 1639-1655. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-020-10326-w
25. Johnson N. D., Koyama M. (2017). States and economic growth: Capacity and constraints. Explorations in Economic History, 64, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eeh.2016.11.002
26. Knutsen, C. H., Teorell, J., Wig, T., et al. (2019). Introducing the Historical Varieties of Democracy dataset: Political institutions in the long 19th century. Journal of Peace Research, 56(3), 440-451. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022343318823866
27. Kong, L., & Woods, O. (2018). The ideological alignment of smart urbanism in Singapore: Critical reflections on a political paradox. Urban Studies, 55(4), 679-701. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098017746528
28. León, L. F. A., Rosen, J. (2021). Technology as ideology in urban governance. In Smart Spaces and Places. Routledge. pp. 166-175. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022343318823866
29. Lukas, M. (2019). Urban governance. The Wiley Blackwell encyclopedia of urban and regional studies. pp. 1-11.
30. Macintyre, T., Lotz-Sisitka, H., Wals, A., et al. (2018). Towards transformative social learning on the path to 1.5 degrees. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 31, 80–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2017.12.003
31. Martí-Costa, M., Blanco, I., Parés, M., Subirats, J. (2016). Urban regeneration and governance: How to evaluate participation in a governance network (Spanish)? Tres perspectivas teóricas y un estudio de caso. Participación, políticas públicas y territorio, 27-52.
32. McGuirk, P. M. (2000). Power and policy networks in urban governance: local government and property-led regeneration in Dublin. Urban studies, 37(4), 651-672. https://doi.org/10.1080/00420980050003955
33. McGuirk, P., Dowling, R. (2021). Urban governance dispositifs: cohering diverse ecologies of urban energy governance. Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space, 39(4), 759-780. https://doi.org/10.1177/2399654420957329
34. McGuirk, P., Dowling, R., Maalsen, S., Baker, T. (2021). Urban governance innovation and COVID‐19. Geographical Research, 59(2), 188-195. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-5871.12456
35. Mubarakshahi, M., Nia, H., Reza, M., et al. (2018). Theoretical explanation of the ontology of regional governments (Persian). Political Geography Research, 4(2), 155-176. https://doi.org/10.22067/pg.v4i2.85958
36. Mutisya, E., Yarime, M. (2014). Moving towards urban sustainability in Kenya: A framework for integration of environmental, economic, social and governance dimensions. Sustainability Science, 9(2), 205–215. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-013-0223-7
37. O’Brien, P., Pike, A., Tomaney, J. (2019). Governing the ‘ungovernable’? Financialisation and the governance of transport infrastructure in the London ‘global city-region’. Progress in Planning, 132, 100422. https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0305900617300806
38. Pezdek, K., Dobrowolski, R., & Michaluk, T. (2020). Habermas and the therapeutic function of language. Nursing Philosophy, 21(2), e12290. https://doi.org/10.1111/nup.12290
39. Pierre, J. (2009). Reinventing Governance, Reinventing Democracy? Policy and Politics, 37(4): 591–609.
40. Rezaei, M.R. (2017). Measuring the impact of administrative bureaucracy on the process of good urban governance, a case study: Shiraz metropolis (Persian). Research and urban planning, 9(32), 31-40.
41. Ritzer, G. Stepnisky, J. (2017). Contemporary Sociological Theory and Its Classical Roots: The Basics, AGE Publications.
42. Schaffer C. L., White M., Brown C. M. (2018). A tale of three cities: Defining urban schools within the context of varied geographic areas. SAGE, 50(6), 507–523. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013124517713605
43. Schubert, C. (2018). Social innovation: a new instrument for social change? Innovation society today: Perspectives, Fields, and Cases, 371-391. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-19269-3_17
44. Sehested, K. (2001). Investigating urban governance: from the perspectives of policy networks, democracy and planning. Available online: https://rucforsk.ruc.dk/ws/portalfiles/portal/57417928/Investigating_urban_governance.pdf (accessed on 4 March 2023).
45. Seo, B. K., & Joo, Y. M. (2019). Innovation or episodes? Multi-scalar analysis of governance change in urban regeneration policy in South Korea. Cities, 92, 27-35. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2019.03.010
46. Shi, T., Zhang, W., Zhou, Q., Wang, K. (2020). Industrial structure, urban governance and haze pollution: Spatiotemporal evidence from China. Science of The Total Environment, 742, 139228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.139228
47. Weber, M. (1962). Basic concepts in sociology. Citadel Press.
48. Weber, M. (1985). The Protestant Ethic and The Spirit of Capitalism, New York: Scribners Sons.
49. Weber, M. (2012). The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. United States: Dover Publications.
50. Zhu, S., Li, D., & Jiang, Y. (2020). The impacts of relationships between critical barriers on sustainable old residential neighborhood renewal in China. Habitat International, 103, 102232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2020.102232
51. Zhao, P., Hu, H., Zhao, Y. (2023). Investigating the central place theory using trajectory big data, Fundamental Research. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fmre.2023.08.007