Our professor Dr.Mandi introduced us to an interesting concept of “Theory X and Theory Y”. Though I had heard about it before, its true essence is understood only now in context to management.
The theories were created and developed by Douglas McGregor. They describe two different attitudes towards employee motivation.
Theory X managers think that the employees are inherently lazy. They dislike their work. They need to be controlled and coerced to work.
Theory Y management has strong faith in its employees. The management thinks that the employees are self-motivated and enjoy their work.
Both these approaches are two extremes and as human beings, we would be somewhere in between. However the intention is to be closer to Theory Y in real life.
Suppose a manager finds an employee wiling his time in a work station. Instead of reprimanding the person, the manager needs to act as a guardian and have strong conviction that the employee is productive. The manager needs to stand by such employees and believe that they are better than the way they have been acting.
Surprised!
I asked my professor if the manager has to act dumb and ignore the obvious.
My professor explained that the manager doesn’t ignore but believes.
In spite of having the full knowledge about the undesirable behaviour of its employees the management needs to treat them as family.
The idea is to build a congenial and trustworthy environment by acting in that way. As an example, consider a scenario in which you were spotted by your father doing something unwanted, but instead of scolding he ignored and went about being proud of his child. Such an instance shames the person into doing what is right. Theory Y is thus desirable as it intends to change the employees’ outlook into being productive.
Logically, either theory is not completely encompassing. In theory X, active employees would suffer while in theory Y there would be free riders. The difference is that Theory X under tight control by management would create a depressed culture while Theory Y would lead to an open and sanguine atmosphere.
And common sense tells us happy people are more productive!
The theories were created and developed by Douglas McGregor. They describe two different attitudes towards employee motivation.
Theory X managers think that the employees are inherently lazy. They dislike their work. They need to be controlled and coerced to work.
Theory Y management has strong faith in its employees. The management thinks that the employees are self-motivated and enjoy their work.
Both these approaches are two extremes and as human beings, we would be somewhere in between. However the intention is to be closer to Theory Y in real life.
Suppose a manager finds an employee wiling his time in a work station. Instead of reprimanding the person, the manager needs to act as a guardian and have strong conviction that the employee is productive. The manager needs to stand by such employees and believe that they are better than the way they have been acting.
Surprised!
I asked my professor if the manager has to act dumb and ignore the obvious.
My professor explained that the manager doesn’t ignore but believes.
In spite of having the full knowledge about the undesirable behaviour of its employees the management needs to treat them as family.
The idea is to build a congenial and trustworthy environment by acting in that way. As an example, consider a scenario in which you were spotted by your father doing something unwanted, but instead of scolding he ignored and went about being proud of his child. Such an instance shames the person into doing what is right. Theory Y is thus desirable as it intends to change the employees’ outlook into being productive.
Logically, either theory is not completely encompassing. In theory X, active employees would suffer while in theory Y there would be free riders. The difference is that Theory X under tight control by management would create a depressed culture while Theory Y would lead to an open and sanguine atmosphere.
And common sense tells us happy people are more productive!
No comments:
Post a Comment