Theory of Motivation - X vs Y - the 2 viewpoints

   

What is it?

Douglas McGregor's 1960 publication which highlighted the concepts of Theory X and Theory Y managers have forever been used to explain the art of motivation based on human behaviour. It encapsulated a fundamental distinction between the different management styles and is a valid basic principle from which to develop positive management style and techniques to propel organisations towards excellence.

Theory X and Theory Y

Organisations consist of employees and managers. The theory delves on the attitude and outlook of managers - the direction and growth of the organisation is in the hands of managers and it is solely their way of managing things which leads to proper motivation of the employees and in the process, achieve growth in the organisation.It is important to note here that Theory X and Theory Y looks into managerial psychology and their way of planning and running the organisation. Thus, it focuses on the class of managers and their behavioral attributes and attitude. 

Theory X Managers

His Theory of Motivation states that there is a certain class of mangers who fall in the bracket of Theory X. In this theory management assumes employees are inherently lazy and will avoid work if they can. Because of this, workers need to be closely supervised and comprehensive systems of control put in place. A hierarchical structure is needed, with narrow span of control at each level, for effective management. According to this theory employees will show little ambition without an enticing incentive program and will avoid responsibility whenever they can.

The managers influenced by Theory X believe that everything must end in blaming someone. They think most employees are only out for themselves and their sole interest in the job is to earn money. They tend to blame employees in most situations, without questioning the systems, policy, or lack of training which could be the real cause of failures.

Theory Y Managers

Management influenced by this theory assumes that employees are ambitious, self-motivated, anxious to accept greater responsibility and exercise self-control, self-direction, autonomy and empowerment. Management believes that employees enjoy their work. They also believe that, given a chance, employees have the desire to be creative at their work place and become forward looking. There is a chance for greater productivity by giving employees the freedom to perform to the best of their abilities, without being bogged down by rules.

A Theory Y manager believes that, given the right conditions, most people will want to do well at work and that there is a pool of unused creativity in the workforce. They believe that the satisfaction of doing a good job is a strong motivation in itself. A Theory Y manager will try to remove the barriers that prevent workers from fully actualizing themselves.

The following diagram gives a clear explanation about Theory X and Theory Y managers:

Now we further discuss the role of such managers and the effect on employees through the following four cases. As and where possible, examples from my experience of working under such managers has been highlighted.

Situation I:   Employee dislikes his work and manager assumes he is lazy

This kind of a situation is seen in many organisations where lack of clear directive principles and ineffective goal setting leads to disillusionment and non-motivation among the employees to perform better. During my working days, while working in various committees as junior members, I often found seniors at the leadership didn't care much about us or the betterment of the club as a whole. Gradually, we assumed a stance where we also didn't work or care much and slowly started disliking working in it. They assumed we were lazy and went about it in that manner. This is a classic case of Theory X Managers where both the management and employees assume that the top rung will be giving orders to the lower rungs and they will follow the same.

Situation II:   Employee likes his work and manager assumes he is lazy

This is probably the most dangerous out of all the four possible situations where the employee likes his work and finds himself highly motivated from within to work and contribute, however the manager still assumes he is lazy and thus is greatly harmful to the motivational growth of the employee and the organisation as a whole.  I had the (mis)fortune of having such a manager during my initial days at my workplace. The team members would work extra hard to achieve already stringent deadlines and produce quality work, often doing value addition on their own and inspiring each other to work harder and stay focused. However, our manager still assumed we were a group of lazy employees and would constantly point out minor issues, without focusing on the larger picture of employee's performance. Even with whole-hearted contributions, the team was deemed to be performing below par and not meeting objectives. Such managers can be detrimental to the success of the organisation as often, good employees might leave the organisation to other rival companies, leading to further attrition.

Situation III:  Employee dislikes his work and manager assumes he is not lazy

In this case, even though employees dislike their work, there is a strong focus from management to think they  can do better and perform much more to aid the organisation. Immense morale boosting attitude, a definite belief that employees will perform better given more optimistic managers at the helm, performance based incentives at all levels are some of the means of getting the employees up to speed. This kind of a workplace is where the Theory Y managers exhibit their true mettle and where the attitude they adopt crucially shapes the future of the organisation.

Situation IV:  Employee likes his work and manager assumes he is not lazy

This is the most ideal case where the employee is focused and likes his work and performs it to the fullest extent. This is achieved as a result of hardworking employees working in an environment of synergy with the management who leave no stones unturned to motivate them through their positive attitude. I had the fortune of being under such a manager during my last days at the workplace. He would focus greatly on the employee's performance on a weekly basis. If there ever came any reasons which could demotivate the employees, he would take it up on an immediate basis and have it solved as soon as possible. An ever-supportive person for the employees, especially in front of the senior management during appraisal times, he had succeeded in bringing harmony in a team which had initially lost all faith in the management due to prior incidents. He would take time out from his personal schedule to interact on a person-to-person basis with us, understand each person's problems and offer solutions and his own help to sort them out so that the employee didn't go home disgruntled. It showed in our work as we too started to scale up and exceed the goals set in front of us, thus leading to excellence of the organisation. Such Theory Y managers make great organisations greater.

In a diverse world of different organisations with different philosophies, I believe that managers should try to become Theory Y managers in situation IV as this leads to successful growth of all stakeholders involved. Even in the case where such a situation becomes hypothetical, I feel that Theory X managers shown in situation II above are the worst managers as the negative vibe they give out harms all the parties.