File Name: theory x and y by douglas mcgregor .zip
The paper identifies major management approaches cited by McGregor as being examples of his Theory Y management principles. The paper traces the historical development of each of these approaches and their application today.
- Beyond Theory Y
- McGregor's legacy: the evolution and current application of Theory Y management
- McGregor's XY Theory of Management
- Motivation - McGregor (Theory X & Theory Y)
He did not imply that workers would be one type or the other. Rather, he saw the two theories as two extremes - with a whole spectrum of possible behaviours in between. The management implications for Theory X workers were that, to achieve organisational objectives, a business would need to impose a management system of coercion, control and punishment.
Beyond Theory Y
Not for sale, reproduction, or distribution. Left to chance, the likelihood that Further Readings significant transfer will occur from most learning ini- Baldwin, T.
Transfer of training: tiatives is truly very small. The good news, however, is A review and directions for future research. Personnel that the development and evaluation of active trans- Psychology, 41, 63— Transfer dence has grown significantly in the last two decades. Ford Eds. Chichester, England: Wiley. Although a number of exceptions exist, the reality is Barnett, S. When and where do that transfer has generally not been actively pursued we apply what we learn?
A taxonomy for far transfer. When it has Psychological Bulletin, , — Blume, B. For example, there is emerging evidence that Transfer of training: A meta-analytic review. Ford, J. Transfer of Similarly, new training designs that focus on identi- training: An updated review and analysis. Performance fying existing knowledge frames, random practice, Improvement Quarterly, 10 2 , 22— Yelon, S.
Pursuing a multidimensional view of transfer. Performance Further, post-training interventions that help train- Improvement Quarterly, 12 3 , 58— The most important lessons are to think practices employed, which in turn shape the attitudes, of multiple domains of transfer intervention—not work behavior, and performance of subordinates.
Explicitly articulating training objectives, to consider alternative sets of assumptions. In the involving managers and peers in the training pro- final analysis, McGregor hoped that increased self- cess and linking transfer outcomes with traditional awareness might prompt attitudinal and behavioral organizational reward systems, are the most prom- changes among managers.
Timothy T. Theory X and Theory Y assumptions about human behavior in organiza- Importance tions, even if they are unaware of doing so.
Second, McGregor, a seminal figure in the field of manage- two broad categories of managerial assump- ment, was among the earliest humanistic psycholo- tions can be identified: a pessimistic view which gists whose theorizing developed in response to the McGregor labeled theory x and a more optimis- perceived limitations of both scientific management tic view theory y. Third, there are three primary and the human relations movement.
McGregor also noted that people dif- terms of recognition and in 33rd place with respect fer in their levels of ambition, willingness to accept to importance. By the time of the 25th year reprint- responsibility, and desire for security, but the first ing of The Human Side of Enterprise in , it three dimensions are of central importance.
Fifth, enacted managerial prac- commentary was subsequently provided by William tices influence employee motivation and work L. Gardner and John R.
Schermerhorn in their behavior. Sixth, because melody, well worth listening to over and over managers are typically unaware of the self-fulfilling again. His respect for innate human capacities— nature of their assumptive worlds, there is often talent, willingness to accept responsibility, creativity, a misperception of cause and effect.
The manager and capacity for personal growth is well evidenced holding theory x beliefs may unwittingly engineer a by many practices in our best-run organizations. Completing the self-directed work teams, employee involvement groups, job enrichment. Argyris proposed that McGregor was one of the first advocates of what is organizations needed to shift from the pattern of now referred to as the positive psychology move- behaviors associated with theory x—pattern a—to ment. With good management practices, he argued, a pattern associated with theory y—pattern b.
It would also entail and followers, including authentic leadership, ethi- examining data from intact natural work groups cal leadership, servant leadership, and transforma- where differences in managerial attitudes and behav- tional leadership. McGregor Over a period of 40 years, about a dozen attempts himself conducted no research related to his for- have been made to measure managerial x and y mulations, nor did he attempt to make his variables assumptions, but most efforts have provided no operational in any kind of measurement procedures.
Frequently, items have McGregor did, though, identify management prac- been assembled and published in textbooks for stu- tices that he thought were consonant with theory dents to use in conducting a self-assessment.
A few y assumptions, such as participative leadership, studies have reported limited psychometric data, delegation, job enlargement, and performance such as reliability coefficients, but until recently, no appraisals. For example, in his book Leadership and research has been conducted to develop a construct Motivation, McGregor devoted two chapters to the valid measure of managerial theory x and y attitudes Scanlon plan, and other chapters suggested other and behaviors.
It is, therefore, not surprising that types of management initiatives. He collected eluded management scholars and researchers, to this attitudinal and self-perception data from managers day—namely, that theory x and theory y pertain to and their subordinates along with individual per- individual differences in assumptions about people formance data. Performance could not be There are two primary explanations for why assessed at the work group level due to outputs being there has been so little research that directly tests incomparable.
First, a direct test of theory x follow-up research. However, in a just completed, and theory y is a difficult undertaking. The requisite but as yet unpublished study by Richard Kopelman data include managerial assumptions and behaviors, and associates , managerial attitudes and behaviors along with individual and work-unit level indica- were assessed along with individual and group-level tors of work behavior and performance.
The cen- performance data. Associations between managerial tral research question might be framed as follows: x and y behaviors and individual- and group-level Do work groups led by managers with theory y performance were significant, and the effect sizes assumptions demonstrate higher levels of employee were medium and large, respectively. As anticipated, engagement motivation, commitment, and creativ- managerial behaviors were more strongly associated ity and higher levels of individual and work-unit with performance than were managerial x and y performance, as compared to groups led by theory attitudes.
Theory X and Theory Y Practical Implications difficult to enact in environments characterized by Several substantive questions might be researched continuous, turbulent exogenous changes, and by given the recent development of construct valid mea- powerful external complexities requiring interorga- sures of the focal variables in theory x and theory nizational, global, virtual teams.
The optimal set of y. There are also implications for practice that flow circumstances for a theory y mind-set and approach from theory x and theory y.
McGregor asserted participants, where capabilities and trust can develop that managerial attitudes reflect deep-seated and along with shared goals and norms, and where self- possibly unconscious beliefs. This may partially managed teams can flourish with managers serving explain why brief workshops which attempt to more as coaches than as bosses. A more theories, serving to specify the realms of applicabil- modest, yet realistic, aim may be to provide diag- ity.
McGregor recognized that there are boundary nostic information to managers, so they might pri- conditions for theory y. Along these lines, research might examine the Richard E.
Kopelman and efficacy of direct and indirect methods of manage- David J. Prottas ment development via theory x and theory y diag- nostic data.
There has also been Scholarship general agreement among both academics and prac- titioners that a new social-psychological contract has Further Readings been emerging—one that emphasizes new employer and employee responsibilities. Employers are now Carson, C. Management Decision, 43, — Pygmalion in management: Productivity decision making, and foster challenging and stimu- as a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Personnel responsible for developing their own careers. From Psychology, 26, 95— Organizational Dynamics, 33, — Kopelman, R. There are boundary condi- construct-valid measure.
Journal of Managerial Issues, tions that moderate the efficacy of theory y manage- 20, — Organizational climate is one such Kopelman, R. The human side of enterprise. Leadership and motivation. Quality Management was published in by McGregor, D. The professional manager.
In defense of theory y. Organizational Dynamics, 4, 17— TQM is quality in all functional areas. TQM is Schein, E. Douglas McGregor: Theoretician, an approach to improving the effectiveness and moral philosopher or behaviorist? An analysis of the flexibility of businesses as a whole. It is essentially a interconnections between assumptions, values and way of organising and involving the whole behavior.
Journal of Management History, 17, — Even though quality man- all employees actively participate.
McGregor's legacy: the evolution and current application of Theory Y management
McGregor presented and explained the two theories in what is considered a classic work of management science, his book The Human Side of Enterprise. Theory X and Theory Y represent two basic assumptions about the human capacity for and relationship to work. Theory X hinges on the assumption that humans are inherently work-averse. The workplace is therefore authoritarian in nature, with top-down pressure serving as the primary mechanism of motivation. Under Theory X, employees are assumed to have little ambition and avoid responsibility, preferring a secure, base work environment. Therefore, they require constant supervision and coercion to maintain productivity.
McGregor's XY Theory of Management
Theory X and Theory Y are theories of human work motivation and management. The two theories proposed by McGregor describe contrasting models of workforce motivation applied by managers in human resource management , organizational behavior , organizational communication and organizational development. Theory X explains the importance of heightened supervision, external rewards, and penalties, while Theory Y highlights the motivating role of job satisfaction and encourages workers to approach tasks without direct supervision.
Motivation - McGregor (Theory X & Theory Y)
Work is changing. And the approach to and requirements of leadership are changing with it. The modern manager knows how to distribute responsibility, instill trust in their employees, and motivate team members to deliver their best work and ideas. But there are times when management is less about leadership and more about the staunch enforcement of rules and micromanagement of production. These differing management styles have been coined in the academic management community as Theory X and Theory Y. Because employees have historically been given a flat exchange of time and energy for income, workplace incentives have often been rooted in a fear of loss of employment, in earning potential from extra productivity, or in acquiescing to managerial dominance for promotion. Theory X managers are likely to believe that employees are lazy, fear-motivated, and in need of constant direction.
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 organisational development, and to improving organisational 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. Perhaps the most noticeable aspects of McGregor's XY Theory - and the easiest to illustrate - are found in the behaviours of autocratic managers and organisations which use autocratic management styles. Typically characteristics for an X-Theory manager are most or all of these:.
A New Approach
During the past 30 years, managers have been bombarded with two competing approaches to the problems of human administration and organization. The first, usually called the classical school of organization, emphasizes the need for well-established lines of authority, clearly defined jobs, and authority equal to responsibility. The second, often called the participative approach, focuses on […]. The second, often called the participative approach, focuses on the desirability of involving organization members in decision making so that they will be more highly motivated. The classical organizational approach that McGregor associated with Theory X does work well in some situations, although, as McGregor himself pointed out, there are also some situations where it does not work effectively. At the same time, the approach based on Theory Y, while it has produced good results in some situations, does not always do so.
- Вводите ключ и кончайте со всем. Джабба вздохнул. На сей раз голос его прозвучал с несвойственным ему спокойствием: - Директор, если мы введем неверный ключ… - Верно, - прервала его Сьюзан. - Если Танкадо ничего не заподозрил, нам придется ответить на ряд вопросов. - Как у нас со временем, Джабба? - спросил Фонтейн.
Как вы думаете, мисс Флетчер. Сьюзан задумалась. Она чувствовала, что здесь что-то не то, но не могла сообразить, что. Она достаточно хорошо знала Танкадо и знала, что он боготворил простоту. Его доказательства, его программы всегда отличали кристальная ясность и законченность. Необходимость убрать пробелы показалась ей странной. Это была мелочь, но все же изъян, отсутствие чистоты - не этого она ожидала от Танкадо, наносящего свой коронный удар.
Не знаю, ключ ли это, - сказал Джабба. - Мне кажется маловероятным, что Танкадо использовал непроизвольный набор знаков.
Откуда вы узнали. ГЛАВА 74 Шестидесятитрехлетний директор Лиланд Фонтейн был настоящий человек-гора с короткой военной стрижкой и жесткими манерами. Когда он бывал раздражен, а это было почти всегда, его черные глаза горели как угли. Он поднялся по служебной лестнице до высшего поста в агентстве потому, что работал не покладая рук, но также и благодаря редкой целеустремленности и заслуженному уважению со стороны своих предшественников. Он был первым афроамериканцем на посту директора Агентства национальной безопасности, но эту его отличительную черту никто никогда даже не упоминал, потому что политическая партия, которую он поддерживал, решительно не принимала этого во внимание, и его коллеги следовали этому примеру.
За дверью. - Да, конечно… сэр.