X-Y-Z Leadership Theories to Manage People Effectively - Term Paper Example

Organizational Leadership Introduction Organizational leadership is paramount because it gives directions the employees are to follow in meeting the set goals. It also allows organizations to enjoy a competitive advantage through the decisions made by leaders. However, the success of the organization is only possible when employees and other stakeholders are involved. Similarly, employee’s input is fundamental for smooth running of any organization because it influences the management in different ways. Because of these facts, Douglas McGregor developed Theory X and Theory Y, which are two sets of leadership beliefs influencing human behavior (McGregor, 1960, p. 166). Similarly, William Ouchi developed Theory Z to enable Americans compete and meet the best practices in Japan (Ouchi, & Price, 1978, p. 35). Theory X and Y remind organizations of the simple rules they need to apply in managing people to increase productivity.McGregorstudiedworkers' attitudes and concluded that leadership beliefs have an impact on running of an organization andthe behavior of people (McGregor, 1960, p. 166). Moreover, McGregor proposes that leadership beliefs contribute in the wayemployees are treated as well as an employee’s responsetowards performance and motivation (Allen, 2004, p. 31). This made him believe that traditional organizations are based on either human nature or human motivation. This paper will describe theories X, Y and Z as well as outline their implications in the modern organization. Describe the organizational concepts of Theory X, Theory Y and Theory Z Theory X and Theory Y Different people have different ways of getting motivated, which also affect their work capability. As many people get great satisfaction and take pridefrom the work they do, others view it as a burden, making them work for the sake of surviving. Therefore, much management and psychologists’ theorists have studied what contributes to employee’s motivation and successful approaches to management and have come up with different findings. McGregor developed two contrasting theories of employee motivation and management in the 1960s, which include Theory X and Theory Y (Kopelman, Prottas,& Davis, 2008, p. 265). Despite McGregor developing the two theories, he promoted Theory Y as a basis of practicing good management, arguing that workers werenot machines, as Theory X assumed. The two theories consider how leadership perceives employee motivation and their behaviors (Allen, 2004, p. 31). McGregor also argues that understanding the assumptions of employee motivation can influence leadership styles to manage people effectively. Theory X Theory X assumes that employees are unmotivated and dislike working, making organizational leadership to intervene through an authoritarian style of management (Cunningham, 2011, p. 6). According to theory X, people do not do their duties willingly, butinstead demand pressure from managers to work (Bobic,& Davis, 2003, p. 239). Similarly, organizations of such nature require managers and supervisors who are keen to monitor, and control workers since they do not delegated responsibilities; this calls for a centralized management system. Theory X assumes that management is responsible for organizing elements of productive enterprise such as money, materials, equipment, and people among others, in order to meet the economic needs (Urwick, 2001, p. 14). Through this assumption, the theory purports that the organizational management has a role of assembling all the necessary elements to enable employees work effectively in meeting the goals of the organization. Secondly, the theory assumes that organizational leadership must direct employee's efforts, motivate, control their actions, and modify their behaviors in order to go along with the goals of the company (Urwick, 2001, p. 14). The theory argues that employees must be pushed in order to get work done and for the organization to realize its objectives. This happens because employees want to satisfy their lower needs in order to get motivated and perform less. Thirdly, the theory presumesthat management has a responsibility of getting things done through other people, by persuading, rewarding, punishing, and controlling their activities (Urwick, 2001). This implies that people cannot work without the intervention of leadership, hence calling for regular pushing to fulfill the assigned duties. Threatening and punishing are critical for employees to deliver and adhere to the company policies. Fourthly, Theory X supports that the average person is indolent by nature, and works as little as possible (Urwick, 2001 p. 14). Besides, Theory X assumes that people lack ambition, dislikes responsibility, and prefers to be led. Therefore, leadership must look after the people through strict supervision to enable them work and complete the assigned duties. Satisfying the lower needs of employees no longer motivate them to work,but rather they seek additional rewards in order to work (Bobic, & Davis, 2003, p. 239). Further, Theory X supports that people are inherently self-centered, indifferent to organizational needs, resistant to change, gullible, and not bright (Urwick, 2001 p. 14). The inability of people to think for themselves towards working for the organization to meet the need and being resistant to change makes the theory assume that management should be after the people, to align them with the organizational goals. Today, many organizations use the assumptions of Theory X; they are characterized by punishments and tight controls (Cunningham, 2011, p. 6). Similarly, its applicability results to soft management practices with the aim of bringing harmony at work (Kopelman, Prottas, & Davis, 2008, p. 268). Both management practices may occur because Theory X may be wrong since employees need more than financial rewards; they need deeper motivation and opportunities for self-fulfillment (Allen, 2004, p. 31). Similarly, many managers who lead toward exercising this approach in the workplace obtain poor results. There are a lot that employees miss when this theory is applied as a management style, leading to poor performances (Bobic,& Davis, 2003, p. 239). Additionally, Theory X managers do not give their staffs opportunities they need in order to behave in the expected manner,hencemaking them feel oppressed (Allen, 2004, p. 31). Theory Y McGregor proposed Theory Y after realizing that workers in the 1950s had moved beyond the lower needs and wanted to meet higher social needs (Kopelman, Prottas,& Davis, 2008, p. 257). Based on this conclusion, he developed new managerial assumptions (Kopelman, Prottas,& Falk, 2012, p. 260), which formed the basis of many contemporary leadership styles. One of the assumptions of Theory Y is that people are not resistant by nature to the organizational needs, but molded that way because of the experience in the organization (Cunningham, 2011, p. 6). This assumption means that the organization plays a role in shaping employee's attitudes and acceptance of duties. Secondly, the theory assumes that people are motivated, have the potential for development, capacity to assume responsibility, and are ready to direct their behaviors towards organizational goals (Allen, 2004, p. 31). Hence, the theory recommends that it is the responsibility of the management to make it possible for people to recognize and develop their own human characteristics. The theory questions the role of management and believes employees are willing to work as long as things are in place for self-developments. Thirdly, Theory Y believes that employees apply self-control and direction when pursuing organizational objectives without external control or punishments (Kopelman, Prottas & Davis, 2008, p. 269). The theory does not believe on the external influences working against employees to enable them achieve the goals, but requires a conducive environment.Organizational leadership,aware of its expectation and all that employees require, use theory Y and produces better performances, and results. It also allows employees to grow and develop;therefore, it is result-oriented to employees and organizational leadership. Similarly, working under Theory Y environment facilitates employee’s growth and responsibility, which is critical for any organization (Kopelman, Prottas,& Davis, 2008, p. 272). Employees feel motivated since the environment for work is conducive. Additionally, employees are fulfilled and behave in the expected standard since the leadership meets all their needs (Allen, 2004). Therefore, Theory Y reveals that a person-orientedleadershipis when the employees enjoy their work, applies self-control and motivation, driven by reward, and enjoys the responsibility (Cunningham, 2011). It adds that the employees should be able to practice imagination, creativity, praised by leaders who should also welcome their suggestions (Kopelman, Prottas, & Falk, 2012). Theory Z Theory Z is developed from the assumption that Japanese organizations were most productive and efficient in the past, and they had influence in America and Europe (Urwick, 2001). However, the secret to their success was not their products, but ways of managing people (Urwick, 2001). Most employees who worked in Japanese organizations were empowered, engaged and productive to their employers (Allen, 2004, p. 31). This approach convinced Management professor William Ouchi and thought western countries could learn from Japan’ssuccess (Ouchi, & Price, 1978). Ouchi is the promoter of Theory Z, which is a blend of western and eastern best management practices. The proponent of this theory believes it is important because it reduces employee's turnover, increases commitments, and improves morale and satisfaction as well as productivity (Allen, 2004). For an organization to realize the benefits of the above, it must consider several factors. For example, Theory Z stipulates that developing a high organizational philosophy and culture can give it an advantage, hence making employees work (Urwick, 2001, p. 14). Employees need to understand the business philosophy and adopt the culture to enable them meet the goals. Similarly, employees need to believe in what they are doing and be in line with the company’s goals (Allen, 2004, p. 31). Therefore, Theory Z believes organizational philosophy and culture are essential in improving performances. Secondly, Theory Z calls for long-term employee development and employment (Urwick, 2001 p. 14). The organization and its leadership have measures and strategies for developing employees through promotion and offering training opportunities (Allen, 2004 p. 31). Long-term employment motivates employees, leading to their loyalty in the organization. Staff development also encourages employees to offer their best because they feel secure and identifies with the organization. Thirdly, best results are realized when there is consensus in the decisions. Theory Z believes that this leadership approach encourages employees and expects them to take part in decision-making. This makes them have input in all decisions passed in the organization that favors them. Further, Theory Z leadership is concerned about the happiness and well being of the workers (Allen, 2004, p. 31). It agitates for companies to show honest concern for happiness and health of employees and their families, hence contributing in building solidarity with them. Leadership also puts measures in place for fostering happiness and well-being of employees and their families to enable the organization have a productive workforce. Additionally, Theory Z leadership empowers the workforce to perform duties the way they find it appropriate (Allen, 2004, p. 31). However, there are measures in place, which assess the quality of work by the employees who use informal ways. Through this, employees are encouraged to be innovative by finding solution to organizational problems using different means they know best. Employees have freedom and flexibility when performing tasks and management do not follow them as long as they meet the quality standard. Lastly, Theory Z leadership recognizes the contribution of individuals within the context of a team (Allen, 2004, p. 31). This enables the organization or its leadership to reward employees, even if they work as a team. Similarly, the organization pinpoints individuals as a team as well as recognizing teamwork, which intern benefits all of them. Similarly, strategies developed by Theory Z have been vital in building a stronger working relationship between managers and subordinates. It encourages employee’s participation in decision-making, hence having input in the way the organization is run. Leaders are also concerned about the subordinates, making it easier to have a stronger relationship (Allen, 2004, p. 31). Additionally, managers and junior employees have a better understanding of one another since the system is inclusive. The theory gives equal chances to individuals making them express themselves and conducts themselves within the expected standard. What are the implications of these theories in modern organization? Theory X, Theory Y, and Theory Z have different advantages and disadvantages, making companies use them sparingly depending with the outcome they want achieved. Some are very vital in making the organization meet the goals, especially when employees fail to work with the expectation of their employers. Similarly, they are essential in modeling the workforce to the desired standards to meet the expectation of the organization. Therefore, modern management uses them according to the goals and objectives of the company, and they have proved to have positive and negative consequences. Theory Z has had a positive impact on the management of today's companies. For instance, companies such as Toyota, HP among others recruit employees for long-term and develop an active culture, which defines the organization (Kopelman, Prottas, & Davis, 2008, p. 259). Similarly, these companies give their employees freedom and flexible working hours, which is essential in increasing productivity. Theory Z has defined modern management operations among many organizations because it spells the best practices they can use in making employees achieve and deliver their best in terms of input. Theory X has implications for organizations through its hard approach, which relies on threats, close supervision, and tight controls of the workforce (Oh, 2006, p. 82). Similarly, it uses soft approach, which seeks harmony, and leniency,with the hope that employees would cooperate when requested (Cunningham, 2011, p. 6). Despite the many attempts by companies to apply this theory, hard approach has always resulted to low output, hostility and hard union demands. Similarly, soft approach increases request for rewards in exchange with reducing employee's output (Strauss, 2002, p. 199). However, some organizations have been able to achieve results through optimal application of Theory X. For instance, military organizations are characterized by hostility among the leaders, and the soldiers are given little time to interact with other organizational heads. Most military organizations have shown success using Theory X. Besides the two theories, many organizations have adopted Theory Y because of its perceived importance in increasing organizational performance and motivating employees (Strauss, 2002, p. 199). Similarly, its blend comprising of American and Japanese leadership style has popularized it and made it the best theory for modern organizations to use. Theory Y is used by modern organizations through delegation and decentralization of managements. Today, many organizations are decentralizing controls and reducing number of level executives, which aims at enabling the managers to have many subordinates, forcing them to delegate some duties and decision-making. This is the current practice by many organizations; its roots emanates from Theory Y. Secondly, modern organizations are offering job enlargement with the aim of increasing opportunities to the workforce (Strauss, 2002, p. 199). Theory Y had proposed that job enlargement or broadening to employees adds many opportunities, which satisfy their ego needs (Oh, 2006, p. 82). Today, many organizations offer wider scope of work with the aim of satisfying employees ego, and they have recorded success by improved performance. Similarly, Theory Y is practiced in modern organizational leadership through participative management (Strauss, 2002, p. 199). Modern managements consult employees in decision-making with the goal of tapping their creativity and providing them with control over the work environment. Many organizations also practices holistic approach where they engage employees, with the aim of evaluating their takes about the organizational performance and operations. Theory X rooted for participative management in order to improve performance in the organization; this is what modern companies practice (Cunningham, 2011, p. 6). Lastly, performance appraisal is practiced by modern organizations, stemming from Theory Y. Theory Y assumes that employees should be allowed to set objectives and participate in the evaluation process, to know how well they meet them, and it has become a standard practice in nearly all the organizations. Today, many organizations have formulated different forms of evaluating employee's performances, and it has proved important in know that weaknesses as well as strengths of some employees (Strauss, 2002, p. 199). A as result, it helps organizations and employees in getting a common ground to help one another. Therefore, theory Y offers the best working environment that when implemented can motivate employees to satisfy their higher need through their works. Similarly, this would help organizations meets their targets, since the workforce is motivated to perform. This would, as a result, reduce employee turnover hence saving the organization from recruiting and training staffs, which has proved to be expensive. Conclusion Theory X, Theory Y, and Theory Z acknowledge that organizations have a role of setting a safe environment and providing resources for employees to deliver. However, these theories have different leadership assumption concerning employees. Theory X assumes that employees dislike work and will try to avoid it; they prefer control and direction, seek security and not responsibility, and manager must coerce them to perform. On the other hand, Theory Y assumes that employees view work as a natural part of life, prefers limited control and direction, seek responsibility under proper work conditions and perform better in non-intimidating environment. Lastly, Theory Z assumes that employee’s involvement is essential to increasing productivity and control is applied in formal and informal way. Similarly, it assumes employees prefer to share responsibilities and decision-making, and they perform better in the environment that fosters trust and cooperation. Because of their differences, modern management uses them in different level depending on the goal they want to achieve. Theory Y and Z is often used by organizations that want to improve their performances and acquire competitive advantage through employee's motivation. References Allen, L. A. (2004). Beyond Theory Y. Management Review, 63(4), 31. Bobic, M. P., & Davis, W. E. (2003). A Kind Word for Theory X: Or Why So Many Newfangled Management Techniques Quickly Fail. Journal of Public Administration Research & Theory, 13(3), 239. Cunningham, R. A. (2011). Douglas McGregor-A Lasting Impression. Ivey Business Journal, 75(5), 5-7. Kopelman, R. E., Prottas, D. J., & Davis, A. L. (2008). Douglas McGregor's Theory X and Y: Toward a Construct-valid Measure. Journal of Managerial Issues, 20(2), 255-271. Kopelman, R. E., Prottas, D. J., & Falk, D. W. (2012). Further Development of a Measure of Theory X and Y Managerial Assumptions.Journal of Managerial Issues, 24(4), 450-470. McGregor, D. (1960). The human side of enterprise. New York, 21, 166. Oh, T. K. (2006).Theory Y in the People's Republic of China.California Management Review, 19(2), 77-84 Ouchi, W. G., & Price, R. L. (1978).Hierarchies, clans, and Theory Z: A new perspective on organization development. Organizational Dynamics, 7(2), 25-44. Strauss, G. (2002). Douglas McGregor, Revisited (Book). Industrial Relations, 57(1), 198-200. Theory X and Y Managerial Assumptions.Journal of Managerial Issues, 24(4), 450-470. Theory, 13(3), 239. Urwick, L. F. (2001). Theory Z. SAM Advanced Management Journal (00360805), 35(1), 14. Read More