Abstract
The paper critically observes the McGregor theory x and y and its influence in determining organizational behavior. There is also a development on the actions that are mostly undertaken by the management in curbing some of the behaviors that are manifested by company employees. The implications of adopting the different aspersions as theorized by McGregor are also given a thorough explication. Generally the paper develops an analysis of the management and employee behavior as a consequence of adopting the theories view on motivation factors.
Motivation in Organizations
Management continues to be a challenging task in organizations due to many factors of influence. In his book, The Human Side of Enterprise, McGregor postulates the differing notions involved in management through what he conceptualize as theory x and theory y of motivation. Shanks (2012) defines motivation as the urge to succeed or the feeling that one has that acts as the driving force towards initiating an action, understanding or making efforts towards the realization of desired needs. Therefore, motivation stems from the natural desire to succeed or take part in an activity that fulfills an individual’s goal or needs. These are called intrinsic motivations, as referred to by (Horstmann, 2005). The external rewards and incentives that may initiate the desires and urge to acquire something are on the other hand called the extrinsic. Unlike the intrinsic factors, the extrinsic factors do not stem from the individual’s inner perception, but rather influenced by the externalities of life.
Organizational behaviors in management vary from one form to another. Shanks (2012) notes that one of the main behaviors that is manifested by most employees and workers include the nature and level of responsibility and will to work for the betterment of the company or organization. This means that the individual involved in the work place may portray different behaviors depending on the influence of a variety of factors that continue to influence their space of functionality. Shanks (2012) argues that most employees will develop a character trait that may be as a result of a particular configuration of the rules of management or the management style adopted by the seniors in that particular company. Shanks (2012) continue with the same logic of argument when he postulates that the employee behavior is directly reflective of the management style adopted by the managers.
McGregor’s theory x and y proposes that employees have different behaviors depending on the assumptions and the judgment that is laid down of them by managers. For instance, the x theory holds that ‘some employees’ or the average person dislikes work and make deliberate attempts to avoid it. This person has no ambitions and no sense of responsibility. He would therefore opt to follow what others ask of him rather than lead. McGregor continues to develop that these persons are self-interested and do not care about organizational goals. This therefore means that this people cannot be relied upon in their responsibility to work. People of this nature will tend to remain recalcitrant in their working style. Shanks (2012) assert that negative and stagnant work output is reminiscent of this people’s working style. They continue to lag behind in their working. This behavior is infectious and may spread to the rest of the employees if the management does not take quick action to change the behavior portrayed
The proposition of members who portray the assumption taken by theory x, describes these people as easily gullible and are not necessarily intelligent (Kopelman et al., 2008). This type of persons will therefore have a very different approach to work. They will always complain of the working conditions and portray the unwilling spirit to work. Sometimes they will portray a sense of irresponsibility in their sense of approach. In most cases, as Abraham Maslow explains in his motivation theory of needs, they will strive to achieve the necessities in life and once they have satisfied the need will not an extra mile in improving on the acquired need. In fact their strength and aggressiveness in achieving the needs sought after is slow paced. Priest (1998) observes that there is no sense of urgency in them.
Under this approach the management presumes a two-way approach of the governing of people of this type. One is the hard-lined approach (Shanks, 2012). The hard-lined approach assumes that the members of this category are ignorant and visionless and therefore have to be led in order for realization of the objectives or goals of the company or organization. Therefore the approach utilizes coercion, implicit threats and strict supervision (Horstmann, 2005). The environment of management in this type of approach is full of command and control. The managers and the management team believe that the other employees have no right to question, and since they are presumed to lack the ability to lead, they must be led in what to do and their behavior pattern in the work place are controlled by the management. Priest (1998) notes this method f approach is more dictatorial and is responsible for most of the problems that occur in the companies.
Managers who figure out their employees as incapable of leadership and are ignorant result into hostilities between the management and the working staff (Report on Worker Participation/Theory X and theory Y/Zero-sum management, 2002).This has a negative influence on the output of the company as most people are demotivated by the working conditions and the levels of management practices heaped onto them. Horstmann (2005) speculates that gone are the days of management when the mangers had the absolute power and the staff would just follow the directions without questioning the implications they would have on the company and their working styles. On the contrary employees are free to question the inclination of instructions undertaken by the management if they believe they are nit in line with the efforts of acquiring the desired goals. This behavior by managers is self-annihilating as members will manifest low motivation in their working due to the stand that is taken by the management.
In Maslow’s theory of needs, he speculates that a person is motivated by a need that must be satisfied before the person moves to another level of need. Maslow advances his argument that the satisfaction of needs hierarchical, and once an individual’s need is satisfied the need stops being the motivator. Sanders (2008) observe that in theory x, the main, motivator is money or monetary rewards that are given to employees. Most firms and companies rely of money to motivate their workers. In a theory x environment once employees get the money and it stops being the main motivation behind their working, they normally adopt the hard lined stand in demanding an increment (Shanks, 2012). This will definitely lead to low motivation in the work place and consequently the company may start experiencing a crippling in its financial muscles. (Sanders, 2008) argues that most environment x employees will find motivation sin leisure activities which account for the higher motivation (Gambrel & Cianci, 2003). Employees are most productive when they are in the highest motivation functionality. If therefore the monetary rewards have been substituted by leisure, the employees will often work in lowly motivated psyche and zeal. This will have a stagnating effect or failure to increase optimal output for the company therefore leading to losses. The management style will need to be reappraised and the approach undertaken changed.
The soft approach in the governance and management of the employees as advance by Coelho et al. (2011) will include permissiveness ad seeking of harmony with the employees with the hope that the employees will corporate with the management when asked to do so. This approach however has its own a advantages as employees will keep on demanding an increase in the rewards in exchange for ever decreasing work output (Shanks, 2012). Both approaches taken in the theory x have been highly criticized as highly archaic and do not pose a good approach for management to be followed. McGregor therefore described a more positively oriented theory y.
Theory y as explained by McGregor holds that man is naturally motivated towards work. In his proposition, he notes that work, can be as natural as play. People will continue to be self directed in working provided the work gives satisfaction through meeting the higher needs of motivation. Meeker (1982) notes that higher needs are not normally satisfied, and rarely do they stop being the levels of motivations in individuals. Under this theory, people are responsible enough and do not need to guided or directed in what to do in a command-following environment (Coelho et al, 2011). In this surrounding the persons involved are have the capacity to handle responsibility since creativity and ingenuity are common in a population (Manion, 2005). Under this conditions the individual (in this particular sense the employee), has the capacity to align their personal goals and the goals of the company or firm and therefore will have their own quest to fulfill. This means that such individuals will often manifest strong motivations in their work and dealings.
Just as expostulated above, members of the working community in a company will normally portray the behavior of high responsibility in their working styles. The staff will often know their roles and adapt to work environment with much self-direction. Horstmann (2005) observes that mangers who have these type of employees normally have an easy task in the management of the daily activities if the firm. This is because the employees have a sense of responsibility and duty to work for their own fulfillment. Manion (2005) argues that members who work in such a condition are normally motivated intrinsically since they are able to align their own needs with the goals of the company. This therefore means that they easily identify their needs with the needs of the firm, thus posing a greater advantage to the company. Adopting Maslow’s theory of need, McGregor notes that these members normally enjoy their work. Maslow states that self-actualized members take pleasure in their works, like them, members will enjoy their work as it satisfies their needs.
Implications of the theory in management
The adoption of the theory means that the managers are cognizant of the fact that members of the working staff have the ability to work on their own without much following (Horstmann, 2005). Here the firm managers speculate that the company may adopt some reconstructive measures so as to utilize the high energy in employees. Therefore the management style adopted in this type of approach is different from that posted by theory x management. For instance there is delegation of duty to the employees (Gambrel & Cianci, 2003). In this proposition, the company can decide to decentralize its power of management and reduce the number of management levels developed. This means that the company will in most cases utilize the responsibility of the workers, since they are self-aware and responsible in their duties. After reducing the management levels of the company, it means that there will be an increased number of duties for the fewer managers to handle. Therefore logic dictates what the managers will delegate duties since there is a strong belief in the people employees who are presumed responsible and highly motivated in their work.
Horstmann (2005) points out that in order to satisfy the employees ego needs, the management can broaden the variety and scope of work for the highly motivated employees. This means that the ego of the employees is adequately fed, hence maintaining the competiveness in working. Satisfying the needs of the employees will definitely lead to an improved output from the members. Another decision that may be undertaken from considerations and deliberations reached is the participative management. Participative management entails the inclusive management through consultations with the employees before ethical decisions are made in the company (Gambrel & Cianci, 2003). This type of approach is fulfilling and rewarding to the employees. Horstmann (2005) observes that when employees are involved in the management of the company, especially in the consultative level, they feel part and parcel of the company. This therefore adds to their motivations and the results of their working will manifest high motivations. The company can also adopt the performance appraisal. This can be done through setting of objectives and goals that are to be met by the company. Once the goals and objectives have been set, the company employee will work and strive to achieve them since they know that they will be involved in the process of evaluating the level of acquisition of the set goals and objectives. The management of the firm base on this type of following as advanced in this theory will have greater economic returns to the company. Manion (2005) points out that adopting this theory in the work place will motivate the workers since there is no strict control and commanding of employees. Employees take pride I the fact that the management recognizes their responsibility and would always work to maintain the reputation and satisfy their high needs.
The company can also improve the working and motivation of the employees through embracing the intrinsic and extrinsic motivators. The intrinsic motivators have a greater and long terms effect in the functionality of the firms. For example the management can encourage the employees to develop a healthy relationship with other employees and the management. The employees should not be bossed around, or taken for granted, but rather embraced and listened to. Their needs should be well taken care of (Gambrel & Cianci, 2003). The employees should also be made to feel that they are impacting on someone’s life. Manion (2005) observes that workers who work in hospitals are highly motivated because they feel they are doing meaningful work. This therefore means that if the workers are made to feel that what they are doing is not only important to themselves but the larger society, they remain intrinsically motivated thus improving the work out put that is developed. Choice and competence will also affect the level of motivations of the employees. Through competence, the management should encourage the members to develop and acquire greater skill that will be more meaningful in their work rather than continue in the same old trend. This make employees be motivated as they would like to self-utilize the skills learnt.
Extrinsic motivation may be in inculcated through a variety of ways. This should be done through offering a competitive package for the workers through monetary rewards. Benefits in form of insurance, vacations, sick leaves and retirement accounts will be more fulfilling to workers. The job security and promotions also offer one the motivations that they require. The employees should also be appraised and rewarded for the performance achieved through annual recognition parties and forums. These are just a few of the actions that a company can undertake in motivating the employees so as to improve the functionality of the company.
References
Coelho, F., Augusto, M., & Lages, L. F. (2011). Contextual factors and the creativity of frontline employees: The mediating effects of role stress and intrinsic motivation. Journal of Retailing, 87(1), 31-45. doi:10.1016/j.jretai.2010.11.004
Gambrel, P. A., & Cianci, R. (2003). Maslows hierarchy of needs: Does it apply in A collectivist culture. Journal of Applied Management and Entrepreneurship, 8(2), 143-161. http://search.proquest.com/docview/203916225?accountid=45049
Horstmann, A. M. (2005). Job satisfaction and motivation as factors in the recruitment and retention of histology employees.Walden University). ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, , 172 p. http://search.proquest.com/docview/305373866?accountid=45049
Kopelman, R. E., Prottas, D. J., & Davis, A. L. (2008). Douglas McGregors theory X and Y: Toward a construct-valid measure*. Journal of Managerial Issues, 20(2), 255-271,159-160. http://search.proquest.com/docview/194165861?accountid=45049
Manion,J.(2005). From management to Leadership..San Francisco.Jossey-Bass
Meeker, S. M. E. (1982). Theory Y: Another look. Southern Review of Public Administration (Pre-1986), 5(4), 500-500. http://search.proquest.com/docview/211528115?accountid=45049
Priest, J. T. (1998). Theories X and Y. Journal Record, pp. 1-1. http://search.proquest.com/docview/259375756?accountid=45049
Sanders, J. L. (2008). Discovering process management: One of the least understood concepts in operations management.University of Minnesota). ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, , n/a. http://search.proquest.com/docview/304583672?accountid=45049
Shanks,N.,(2012).Management and Motivation. USA:Jones&Barlet Publishers.Rettrieved from http://www.jblearning.com/samples/076373473x/3473x_ch02_4759.pdf
Worker Participation/Theory X and theory Y/Zero-sum management. (2002). FT.Com, , 1-1. http://search.proquest.com/docview/228668325?accountid=45049
