When managing people, McGregor’s model, indicated below, shows to styles of management. Theory X is directive, whereas Theory Y is enabling, and looks at employee engagement/ teamwork in order to achieve the
McGregor first published his ideas in his book, The Human Side of Enterprise. One of the experiences he had that influenced his thoughts was from work that he did at his grandfather’s establishment for temporary workers in Detroit. Because he was a close acquaintance of Abraham Maslow, who developed “Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs,” McGregor wished to counter the scientific approach on management (“Douglas McGregor,” 2008) and named Theories X & Y.
Theory X and Theory Y, developed by Douglas McGregor, grew out of opposition towards classical management methods. Classical management theorists, such as Fredrick Taylor, focused on scientific training and efficiency and did not account for personal and behavioral issues, such as management styles or job satisfaction. McGregor saw these deficiencies in the classical school of management which lead him to develop a theory of management that would factor the importance of the individual worker. If a manager could tap into the feelings and attitudes of their workers, then the manager would be able increase their employee’s motivation which would then increase production. McGregor’s theory viewed the employee as a person and not as a machine
Hierarchy and status are considered highly important in both Japan and Mexico in addition to a strong separation between the work and home life. Both Mexico and Japan rely on strong work relationships and loyalty in addition to having top down style of commination and information flow. Both countries have a belief in collectivism over individualism, according to Hofstede’s Value Dimensions, with Japan slightly higher on the index, similarly for the masculinity index. The implications of these characteristics can be viewed in each countries’ management approach. These societal values and characteristics influence each countries’ business behavior and methodologies. (Deresky, 2014)
In Japan, for all its business and technological skills, social values take priority over purely economic ones. Reid's interesting description of a new-employee ceremony at a large Japanese corporation, in this case the electronic giant NEC, highlights his celebration of how Confucian ritual dignifies life in the Japanese workplace.
Dr. Hofstede performed a comprehensive study of how values in the workplace are influenced by culture. In the 1970’s, as a Dutch researcher Dr. Geert Hofstede, collected and analyzed data from 116,000 surveys taken from IBM employees in forty different countries around the world. From those results, Hofstede developed a model that identifies four primary dimensions of differentiate cultures. These include: Uncertainty Avoidance (UA), Masculinity-Femininity (MAS), Individualism-Collectivism (IND), Power and Distance (PD). After a further study of the Asian culture by researcher Michael Bond in 1991, Hofstede added a fifth dimension in his theory, Long- and Short-term time orientation (LTO), also referred to as the Confucian Dynamism. His research has framed how cultural differences can be used in professional business transactions. Geert Hofstede 's dimensions analysis can assist the business person in better understanding the intercultural differences within regions and between countries.
Douglas McGregor was a management professor at the MIT Sloan School of Management. He introduced a new motivational theory in his book ‘The Human Side of Enterprise’, stating that all workers were divided into two groups: Theory X and Theory Y. Theory X workers were lazy, irrational and unreliable, and were only motivated by money and threatened by punishment. Theory Y workers were able to seek and accept responsibilities and fulfil any goals given.
Theory X, that adopts the authoritarian view that people normally abhor working and must be forced to work with punishment for failing to meet the objective. These people actually prefer to be directed and lack ambition.
Theory is a journey to uncover the past and improve the future. By uncovering and analyzing a discipline’s theoretical journey, insight and self-awareness are gained. According to Meleis (2012), “Theories are reservoirs in which related knowledge is articulated and organized into meaningful wholes” (p.33). By implementing and analyzing theories, empowerment and guidance for the future is obtained.
McGregor’s Theory X views people in a negative light. This theory assumes that most employees or people in general, dislike working and do not work unless they have to. It believes that people need to threaten to produce results.
According to Kreitner and Kinicki (2013) McGregor contrasted two views on human nature by insisting that Theory Y assumes that people are more positive at work, and believed managers could accomplish more by viewing employees as such (p.9). The other outdated theory, is Theory X, which is a more negative and pessimistic assumption about workers.
Morgan used the metaphor organizations as culture to frame the complex relationships that exist within organizations. Examining organizations through metaphor allows one to imagine concepts and ideas through their own experiences. According to Morgan the power of metaphors is their ability to challenge innovative reasoning. Metaphors combine language and thought to develop new non-literal meanings, when applied they shape and enhance our reality. According to Morgan there has been extensive research regarding the metaphor of organizations as culture. Culture became a hot topic following the introduction of Westernization management styles into the Japanese commercial markets (p. 120). Morgan says that “organization itself is a cultural phenomenon” (p. 120). Culture is a system of knowledge, ideology, values, laws and day to day rituals. By considering organizations as culture, we can focus on the concepts related to the values, beliefs, knowledge, and ethos of the organization. As such we can use this metaphor to understand leadership and organizational behavior through the language and symbols that are most meaningful to us personally. Employees who wish to remain in their organization do best if they understand the components of the culture where they are employed.
The managers were also not trained properly and maintained a centralized management approach. An HMSI manager was quoted in the statement saying, “The Japanese do not understand the workers’ language.” Management failed to understand the ideas brought to them by workers, “could not understand the organizational working from the employees’ point of view.” It was said that the Japanese failed to give Indian managers enough power to solve problems. The Indian managers were production specialists, who had very little understanding of industrial relations issues.
10. McGregor’s Theory X and Theory Y • Taught psychology at MIT. • At Antioch College, McGregor found that his classroom teaching of human relations did not always work in practice. • From these experiences, his ideas evolve and lead him to recognize the influence of assumptions we make about people and our managerial style. Content Theories of Motivation McGregor‟s Theory X and Theory Y – Theory X • Assumes that workers have little ambition, dislike work, avoid responsibility, and require close supervision. – Theory Y • Assumes that workers can exercise self- direction, desire responsibility, and like to work. – Motivation is maximized by participative decision making, interesting jobs, and good group relations.