Douglas McGregor's Theory X and Theory Y
Douglas McGregor, an American social psychologist, proposed his famous
X-Y theory in his 1960 book 'The Human Side Of Enterprise'. Theory x and
theory y are still referred to commonly in the field of management and
motivation, and whilst more recent studies have questioned the rigidity
of the model, Mcgregor's X-Y Theory remains a valid basic principle from
which to develop positive management style and techniques.
McGregor's XY Theory
remains central to organizational development, and to improving
organizational culture.
McGregor's X-Y theory
is a salutary and simple reminder of the natural rules for managing
people, which under the pressure of day-to-day business are all too
easily forgotten.
McGregor maintained that there are two fundamental approaches to
managing people. Many managers tend towards theory x, and generally get
poor results. Enlightened managers use theory y, which produces better
performance and results, and allows people to grow and develop.
Theory x
('authoritarian management' style)
-
The average person
dislikes work and will avoid it he/she can.
-
Therefore most
people must be forced with the threat of punishment to work towards
organisational objectives.
-
The average person
prefers to be directed; to avoid responsibility; is relatively
unambitious, and wants security above all else.
Theory y
('participative management' style)
-
Effort in work is
as natural as work and play.
-
People will apply
self-control and self-direction in the pursuit of organisational
objectives, without external control or the threat of punishment.
-
Commitment to
objectives is a function of rewards associated with their
achievement.
-
People usually
accept and often seek responsibility.
-
The capacity to use
a high degree of imagination, ingenuity and creativity in solving
organisational problems is widely, not narrowly, distributed in the
population.
-
In industry the
intellectual potential of the average person is only partly
utilised.

Characteristics of The
x Theory Manager
-
What are the
characteristics of a Theory X manager? Typically some, most or all
of these:
-
results-driven and
deadline-driven, to the exclusion of everything else
-
intolerant
-
issues deadlines
and ultimatums
-
distant and
detached
-
aloof and arrogant
-
elitist
-
short temper
-
shouts
-
issues
instructions, directions, edicts
-
issues threats to
make people follow instructions
-
demands, never asks
-
does not
participate
-
does not team-build
-
unconcerned about
staff welfare, or morale
-
proud, sometimes to
the point of self-destruction
-
one-way
communicator
-
poor listener
-
fundamentally
insecure and possibly neurotic
-
anti-social
-
vengeful and
recriminatory
-
does not thank or
praise
-
withholds rewards,
and suppresses pay and remunerations levels
-
scrutinises
expenditure to the point of false economy
-
seeks culprits for
failures or shortfalls
-
seeks to apportion
blame instead of focusing on learning from the experience and
preventing recurrence
-
does not invite or
welcome suggestions
-
takes criticism
badly and likely to retaliate if from below or peer group
-
poor at proper
delegating - but believes they delegate well
-
thinks giving
orders is delegating
-
holds on to
responsibility but shifts accountability to subordinates
-
relatively
unconcerned with investing in anything to gain future improvements
-
unhappy
How you can manage
upwards your X theory boss:
Working for an X theory
boss isn't easy - some extreme X theory managers make extremely
unpleasant managers, but there are ways of managing these people
upwards. Avoiding confrontation (unless you are genuinely being bullied,
which is a different matter) and delivering results are the key tactics.
-
Theory X managers
(or indeed theory Y managers displaying theory X behaviour) are
primarily results oriented - so orientate your your own discussions
and dealings with them around results - ie what you can deliver and
when.
-
Theory X managers
are facts and figures oriented - so cut out the incidentals, be able
to measure and substantiate anything you say and do for them,
especially reporting on results and activities.
-
Theory X managers
generally don't understand or have an interest in the human issues,
so don't try to appeal to their sense of humanity or morality. Set
your own objectives to meet their organisational aims and agree
these with the managers; be seen to be self-starting,
self-motivating, self-disciplined and well-organised - the more the
X theory manager sees you are managing yourself and producing
results, the less they'll feel the need to do it for you.
-
Always deliver your
commitments and promises. If you are given an unrealistic task
and/or deadline state the reasons why it's not realistic, but be
very sure of your ground, don't be negative; be constructive as to
how the overall aim can be achieved in a way that you know you can
deliver.
-
Stand up for
yourself, but constructively - avoid confrontation. Never threaten
or go over their heads if you are dissatisfied or you'll be in big
trouble afterwards and life will be a lot more difficult.
-
If an X theory boss
tells you how to do things in ways that are not comfortable or right
for you, then don't questioning the process, simply confirm the
end-result that is required, and check that it's okay to 'streamline
the process' or 'get things done more efficiently' if the chance
arises - they'll normally agree to this, which effectively gives you
control over the 'how', provided you deliver the 'what' and 'when'.
And this is really the
essence of managing upwards X theory managers - focus and get agreement
on the results and deadlines - if you consistently deliver, you'll
increasingly be given more leeway on how you go about the tasks, which
amounts to more freedom. Be aware also that many X theory managers are
forced to be X theory by the short-term demands of the organisation and
their own superiors - an X theory manager is usually someone with their
own problems, so try not to give them any more.
Comments on Theory X
and Theory Y Assumptions
These assumptions are based on social science research which has been
carried out, and demonstrate the potential which is present in man and
which organizations should recognize in order to become more effective.
McGregor sees these two theories as two quite separate attitudes. Theory
Y is difficult to put into practice on the shop floor in large mass
production operations, but it can be used initially in the managing of
managers and professionals.
In "The Human Side of Enterprise" McGregor shows how Theory Y affects
the management of promotions and salaries and the development of
effective managers. McGregor also sees Theory Y as conducive to
participative problem solving.
It is part of the manager's job to exercise authority, and there are
cases in which this is the only method of achieving the desired results
because subordinates do not agree that the ends are desirable.
However, in situations where it is possible to obtain commitment to
objectives, it is better to explain the matter fully so that employees
grasp the purpose of an action. They will then exert self-direction and
control to do better work - quite possibly by better methods - than if
they had simply been carrying out an order which the y did not fully
understand.
The situation in which employees can be consulted is one where the
individuals are emotionally mature, and positively motivated towards
their work; where the work is sufficiently responsible to allow for
flexibility and where the employee can see her or his own position in
the management hierarchy. If these conditions are present, managers will
find that the participative approach to problem solving leads to much
improved results compared with the alternative approach of handing out
authoritarian orders.
Once management becomes persuaded that it is under estimating the
potential of its human resources, and accepts the knowledge given by
social science researchers and displayed in Theory Y assumptions, then
it can invest time, money and effort in developing improved applications
of the theory.
McGregor realizes that some of the theories he has put forward are
unrealizable in practice, but wants managers to put into operation the
basic assumption that:
* Staff will contribute more to the organization if they are treated
as responsible and valued employees.
Theory z - William
Ouchi
First things first -
Theory Z is not a Mcgregor idea and as such is not Mcgregor's extension
of his XY theory.
Theory Z was developed
not by McGregor, but by
William Ouchi, in his book 1981 'Theory Z: How
American management can Meet the Japanese Challenge'.
William Ouchi is
professor of management at UCLA, Los Angeles, and a board member of
several large US organisations.
Theory Z is often
referred to as the 'Japanese' management style, which is essentially
what it is. It's interesting that Ouchi chose to name his model 'Theory
Z', which apart from anything else tends to give the impression that
it's a Mcgregor idea. One wonders if the idea was not considered strong
enough to stand alone with a completely new name... Nevertheless, Theory
Z essentially advocates a combination of all that's best about theory Y
and modern Japanese management, which places a large amount of freedom
and trust with workers, and assumes that workers have a strong loyalty
and interest in team-working and the organisation.
Theory Z also places
more reliance on the attitude and responsibilities of the workers,
whereas Mcgregor's XY theory is mainly focused on management and
motivation from the manager's and organisation's perspective. There is
no doubt that Ouchi's Theory Z model offers excellent ideas, albeit it
lacking the simple elegance of Mcgregor's model, which let's face it,
thousands of organisations and managers around the world have still yet
to embrace. For this reason, Theory Z may for some be like trying to
manage the kitchen at the Ritz before mastering the ability to cook a
decent fried breakfast. Learn more about Theory Z
References:
www.businessballs.com
http://www.accel-team.com/human_relations/hrels_03_mcgregor.html |