Human Resource Management And Application Of McGregor's X and Y in Employee Motivation Blog Post - 5

 

Application of McGregor’s X and Y in Employee Motivation

     Figure 1: McGregor’s X and Y

           Source: https://pmvidya.com/blog/mcgregors-theory-of-x-and-y/

In the 1960s, Douglas McGregor, a management professor at MIT, presented the theory that a manager's attitude might affect staff motivation. McGregor developed two hypotheses for how managers understand and respond to employee motivation in his 1960 book, The Human Side of Enterprise (Mohammad Atiqur Rahman Sarker, 2012 ). He called these competing approaches to inspiring action "Theory X management" and "Theory Y leadership," respectively. A manager's job in both views is to make the most efficient use of available resources, including employees.

Beyond this shared feature, however, their underlying worldviews and values diverge greatly. In the 1960s, Douglas McGregor, a social psychologist, established two competing ideas to explain how managers' perceptions about what drives their workers might impact their management style (Pepitone, 2000). These, he designated as Theories X and Y. McGregor claims that the leaders of Theory X count on the following. Most individuals find work to be intrinsically unpleasant and will go to great lengths to avoid it if they can. 

The vast majority of individuals are not ambitious, dislike taking initiative, and would rather be told what to do. People often lack the innate ability to think creatively about how to address issues in the workplace (Turner, 2019). Only at the safety and physiology levels of Maslow's hierarchy of requirements can motivation develop. All too often, individuals just think about themselves. They have to be managed strictly and sometimes even bullied into working towards the company's goals.

People, in general, are not fond of shifting gears. People in general are easily duped and lack intelligence. According to Theory X, money is the key motivator for workers, with safety coming in a close second. One may choose between a hard and soft method of achievement within the framework of Theory X (Harris, 1994). The hard method of motivation is based on command and control principles, including as coercion, implicit threats, micromanagement, and strict regulations. 

Figure 2: Theory X and Theory Y

Source: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/theory-x-y-sga-recruitment

The softer strategy, on the other hand, is to be lenient and try to find common ground with the staff so that they will be more amenable to working with management when necessary. The problem is that none of these extremes is ideal. The hostile atmosphere, deliberately poor production, and excessive union demands are the effects of the harsh approach. When people are treated gently, they start expecting more pay for the same amount of effort (Clark, 2012). The best human resource management strategy, it would appear, would fall somewhere in the middle of these two extremes. Nonetheless, McGregor argues that both strategies are misguided because of flaws in Theory X's foundational assumptions. McGregor, using Maslow's hierarchy of requirements, maintains that a need that has been met loses its ability to inspire (McGregor,1979 ). 

When it comes to workers' basic necessities, the corporation satisfies them with cash. When those requirements are met, the resulting drive fades away. Since Theory X management ignores the importance of needs at a deeper level, it creates obstacles to meeting those wants while at work.  Since of this, it's no surprise that workers prioritize financial incentives because it's the only way for them to try to satisfy higher-level requirements at work. Money isn't always the best or even the only method to achieve happiness and pleasure (James McGrath, 2017 ). Work is used to meet basic necessities, while leisure time is spent pursuing gratification of psychological demands. But workers are at their most effective when their professional objectives also satisfy their deeper personal demands.

McGregor argues that the lack of motivation in a command-and-control setting is due to the fact that basic human needs have been met for the most part in the contemporary day. It's a self-fulfilling prophesy that workers in such an environment would detest their jobs, shirk responsibilities, lack enthusiasm for the company's mission, fight against necessary reforms, and so on (Ouchi, 1993 ). McGregor believed that the likelihood of receiving consistent inspiration increased when working towards Theory Y.

Most individuals never fully gratify their need for love and acceptance, much alone their desire to develop into their full potential. Therefore, it is via satisfying these more fundamental demands that workers are most effectively motivated. The following are assumptions of Theory Y management that stand in stark contrast to those of Theory X: The right settings may make work seem like play (Stoyan Stoyanov, 2017). If employees are invested in their job and the success of the firm, they will take initiative and think outside the box to achieve their goals.

If incentives are in place that caters to people's higher wants, including self-fulfillment, they will be dedicated to achieving their quality and productivity goals. Creativity is contagious and may be found at all levels of an organization (Lambourne, 2013 ). People are generally capable of taking on and meeting challenges associated with responsibility because they possess a high degree of imagination and resourcefulness. People will start to look for places to lay the blame under these circumstances.

In this scenario, the employee's desire for personal growth might serve as a unifying factor in the pursuit of corporate objectives. McGregor emphasized that a Theory Y management style does not indicate a passive attitude (Lauby, 2005). McGregor understood that certain employees may lack the maturity anticipated by Theory Y and, as a result, need more stringent restrictions that may be loosened as they gain experience and maturity. 

The following scientific management practices may increase morale in the workplace if Theory Y is correct: When companies transfer authority and flatten their organizational structures, managers are faced with the prospect of having a larger number of direct reports and, by extension, a greater number of employees over whom they have some degree of authority to make decisions (Anne Bruce, 1998). When a person's employment responsibilities are expanded, it provides more stimulation and room for the gratification of personal pride.

Employees' innovative potential is unleashed when they are given a say in the decisions that affect them and their working conditions. Staff members are more invested and loyal when they are given opportunities to create goals and take part in self-evaluation. If done well, this kind of work environment may improve and sustain motivation by allowing workers to use their occupations to meet their most fundamental needs.

Douglas McGregor, a social psychologist, conceived Theories X and Y. The article explains two different perspectives that managers have on their employees: It's all downhill from there, according to Theory X, since people are lazy, unmotivated, and uninterested in taking initiative (Simons, 2011). Managers that hold this belief are likely to rely on a rigorous "carrot and stick" approach to employee motivation, in which excellent performance is rewarded and bad performance is punished.

People are intrinsically driven and thrive in a demanding work environment, according to Theory Y. Managers that operate on this premise create a more cooperative environment for their staff members, inspiring them to take initiative via the provision of clear objectives, a delegation of authority, and the freedom to make choices.

There are a number of elements that might influence your decision between these two strategies, but your assumptions about what drives your team members will likely have the most effect (Gupta, 2020 ). There are a number of factors to consider when designing an effective workplace culture, including the structure of your business (whether it is hierarchical or flat), the nature of the job your employees do (whether it is repetitive or demanding), and the (amateur or experienced).

Quite a few companies employ Theory X nowadays. Theory X supports the use of strict control and monitoring. It suggests workers are resistant to change in the workplace. That's why it's not a good environment for creativity. The methods of Theory Y are widely used by businesses today (Arup Varma, 2008). Theory Y states that managers should establish and foster a work environment that offers possibilities to workers to take initiative and self-direction. 

Opportunities for employees to make positive impacts on the business should be encouraged. By promoting shared decision-making and collaborative problem-solving, Theory Y seeks to increase efficiency and effectiveness in businesses (Cadwell, 2002). A key tenet of Theory Y is the identification of one's unique contributions to an organization. It helps bring the organization's goals into line with those of its personnel.

Thus, we may argue that Theory X gives a pessimistic perspective of employees’ nature and conduct at work, whereas Theory Y presents an optimistic view of the employees’ nature and behavior at work (Richard Luecke, 2006). If we draw parallels with Maslow's hierarchy of demands, we may state that Theory X assumes that workers place a premium on pay and benefits, whereas Theory Y assumes that workers place a higher premium on opportunities to develop personally and professionally.

References

Anne Bruce, ‎. S. P., 1998. Motivating Employees. London: McGraw Hill Professional.

Arup Varma, ‎. S. B. ‎. D., 2008. Performance Management Systems: A Global Perspective. London: Routledge.

Cadwell, C. M., 2002. Performance Management. New York: AMA.

Clark, T., 2012. The Employee Engagement Mindset: The Six Drivers for Tapping into the Hidden. London: McGraw Hill Professional.

 Gupta, A. D., 2020 . Strategic Human Resource Management: Formulating and Implementing HR Strategies for a Competitive Advantage. London: Routledge / Taylor & Francis Group.

Harris, D. H., 1994. Organizational Linkages: Understanding the Productivity Paradox. Washington: National Academies Press.

James McGrath, ‎. B., 2017 . The Little Book of Big Management Theories. London: Pearson Education Limited.

Lambourne, W., 2013 . Legitimate Leadership. Washington: Createspace Independent Pub.

Lauby, S. J., 2005. Motivating Employees. Washington: American Society for Training and Development.

McGregor, D., 1979 . The Human Side of Enterprise. London: McGraw Hill.

Mohammad Atiqur Rahman Sarker, M. J., 2012 . Employee Motivation Through Non-Financial Incentives. Washington: Lap Lambert Academic Publishing GmbH KG.

Ouchi, W. G., 1993 . Theory Z: How American Business Can Meet the Japanese Challenge. Tokyo: Avon.

Pepitone, ‎. S., 2000. Attempt Motivating Employees. London: McGraw Hill Professional.

Richard Luecke, B. J. H., 2006. Performance Management: Measure and Improve the Effectiveness of Your Employees. Boston: Harvard Business Press.

Simons, R., 2011. Human Resource Management: Issues, Challenges and Opportunities. New York: CRC Press.

Stoyan Stoyanov, ‎. D., 2017. The Human Side of Enterprise. London: CRC Press.

Turner, P., 2019. Employee Engagement in Contemporary Organizations: Maintaining High. London: Springer Nature.

By: MJM Sabry