McGregor's Theories and Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs - Essay Example

Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs and McGregor's Theories X-Y 2007 Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs and McGregor's Theories X-Y Introduction Over the past decades, the way in which people are managed and motivated has become the primary field of interest in terms of assessing and improving organizational efficiency and marketability. The reason for such turn is evident: growing competitiveness in the market forces modern companies to increasingly rely on skilled and motivated personnel then on pure technologies and products. The importance of effective human resource management (HRM) has been recognised by virtually any company which follows western standards of business. If an organisation fails to properly and effectively manage its human resources in the right areas of the business, at the right time and at the right cost, serious inefficiencies are likely to arise creating considerable operational difficulties and likely business failure (Beardwell, Claydon & Holden, 2003). The same principle is valid for non-business organisations: their success also depends on the management's ability to effectively implement the right solutions to improve motivation and enhance performance of employees. Improving the effectiveness of marine management has recently turned into one of the most intensively debated topic in the UK. The debate mainly covers strategic issues concerning the effectiveness of the management of the marine environment to maximize sustainable benefits from our marine resources while ensuring proper protection. The effectiveness of marine management also depends greatly on the different values, expectations and other essential factors that people bring to their involvement with the sea. The statutory and institutional practices that apply to modern marine management in the UK and the relationship between government and community represent another aspect of the debate. Involvement of many overlapping and sometimes conflicting agencies, processes, legislations, and other factors has forced the Government to propose introducing a Marine Management Organisation (MMO) to act as the key force for the integrated management of marine resources. Evidently, creation of such organisation is associated with numerous difficulties associated with legislation, planning, coordination, licensing, and many others. Unfortunately, these serious difficulties should not overshadow another very important aspect of such organisation's functioning, namely effective management of human resources. The field of HRM is exceptionally complex and multilateral due to highly specific unpredictable nature of human being. As a result, there are many different theories and views on the nature, methods, and techniques of management found in the existing organisational literature. Although the type of organisation proposed by the Government is absolutely new the applicability of universal HRM concepts and theories to managing people even in such a specific organisation can hardly be questioned. However, the choice of correct practices from the general pool is the key factor to make the HRM element contribute effectively to the overall effectiveness and sustainability of the new organisation. Since the emergence of organizational science in the late XIX - early XX century, the scholars have been sharing two dominant views on organizational culture. Apologists of one paradigm led by Frederick Taylor and Harrington Emerson (School of Scientific Management) believed that organizational culture was just one of the tools to ensure greater control over employees. Representatives of another approach such as Elton Mayo, Abraham Maslow, and Douglas McGregor (Human relations school) postulated that organizational culture was supposed to develop and motivate the employees without excessively rigid control (Schultz, 2002). Which of these approaches better fits the specifics of modern marine management is a very interesting question. Main Body Abraham Maslow is one of the brightest representatives of humanistic psychology. This distinct perspective emerged in the 1950s, the time marked by profound social changes, the onset of global movements, emergence of new scholarly paradigms questioning the traditional empiricist and positivist conceptions of the world and human being, and the major change in natural sciences that "discarded the requirement of total objectivity and the complete separation of external world from observer" (Schultz & Schultz, 2004: 483). In psychology, these transformations took shape of the rise of cognitive and humanistic perspectives that actively criticized psychoanalytic theory for portraying people as being directed only by their unconscious wishes and irrational forces. They also did not support the behaviourist school because the latter viewed people as biological robots "who are mechanically programmed by the conditioning force of external stimuli" (Fedorko, 1986: 45). Humanistic psychology viewed the human condition as one integrate unity, something more than a mere sum of physical, social, and psychological characteristics of human being. Proponents of humanistic psychology focused mainly upon human consciousness that they considered the main determinant of behaviour. In their account it was precisely consciousness that made people different from other mammals. Animals do not have abstract thinking while people are able to use symbols as well as think in abstract terms - the main function of consciousness (Fedorko, 1986). The essence of Maslow's theory is the hierarchy of needs and the concept of 'self-actualization' which is development and self-improvement of personality. Human beings have some basic needs from the moment of birth (food, drink, warm cloths and others) that have to be fulfilled by any means before passing over to satisfying any other need. The list may also include needs arising from body hormonal levels/cycles or stresses suffered by the organism. However, fulfilment of other non-basic needs largely depends upon the individual. Musicians must make music, artists must paint, and poets must write if they want to be ultimately at peace with themselves. What humans can be, they must be. They must be true to their own nature and if they are it is called "self-actualization". This category is less a need than a final development stage for the person. Maslow considered that lower needs might be satisfied, but that discontent and restlessness may remain for the individual (Maslow, 1987). This simple descriptive account of human needs suggests that if some experiences a chronic deficiency in terms of needs being satisfied - then this need will drive (motivate) the person's behaviour. The model below suggests that if a need is functionally absent from a person then it has either: - been gratified and is in equilibrium for that person. Behaviour and resources are no urgently focused towards its fulfilment or - the need is subordinated - in the sense that dominant lower needs are insufficiently gratified and higher needs have not yet emerged. The horizontal lines represent a person's level of gratification within this hierarchically integrated framework across all needs, and the vertical line moving upwards through all needs represents personal growth toward self-actualisation which crowns Maslow's hierarchy of needs: However, self-actualization cannot be reached unless the needs of lower order are fulfilled at least to some extent (like safety for instance). If any of basic needs of a person cannot be fulfilled development of the person is likely to stop. For example, if a child felt that he was unwanted in the company of his equals in age, he might spend all his future life trying to win his spurs and become famous, in order to restore his self-respect (Maslow, 1971). And on the contrary, if an individual gradually progresses from fulfilment of lower needs to fulfilment of higher needs it is the main factor of his psychological health. Douglas McGregor described his famous Theory X and Theory Y theories of human motivation in the 1960s (McGregor, 1960). McGregor claimed that there were two distinct approaches to managing people and improving workforce motivation in the organisational practice. The X-approach relies on the assumption that employees are inherently lazy and will avoid work if they are given an opportunity. A typical example of this approach is embodied in the "Taylorian model" of management which was based on the principles of "presumption of guiltiness" and postulated that employees had to be controlled in order to achieve better performance efficiency. The founding father of this model, Frederick Taylor (1911) identified the following major tasks of organizational control: Ceaseless control over the work of each employee through organization the system of supervisors, inspectors, quantity-surveyor, etc; Control over the work of the workshops; Promotion of stimulating and competitive organizational culture which may provide excessive control over the employees (Taylor, 1911); These ideas were further developed by Harrington Emerson who has formulated twelve major principles of scientific human resource management. Emerson believed that: Discipline and permanent control over the employees serve the keys to organizational success; Norms and schedules serve perfect instruments in organizational control over the employees; Organizational environment may provide perfect control over the employees guiding employees' activity, forming employees' dependency and commitment to a company, and punishment of the workers in case of failures (Drucker, 1993). Consequently, McGregor claims that Theory X managers tend to believe that everything must end in blaming someone. Such managers also adopt a strong belief that all prospective employees are only out for themselves and that the first and foremost purpose of the employees' good performance is monetary reward. Expressed lack of trust toward the employee is another distinct characteristic of the Theory X manager (McGregor, 1960). Such characteristics of Theory X managers determine their style of management which is largely authoritarian and relies primarily on the threat of punishment. Theory Y managers adopt an entirely different view of employees perceiving them as ambitious, self-motivated, and responsible persons whom have sufficient self-control, autonomy and empowerment. The key assumption underlying this approach is that employees enjoy performing their functions and duties in the workplace and have the desire to work. As a result, according to Theory Y providing employees with the freedom to take advantage of their positive qualities will bring the best result in terms of performance: the satisfaction coming from good performance is a serious motivation in itself (McGregor, 1960). Conclusion A comparison between Maslow's theory of self-actualisation and McGregor's X and Y theories clearly and unambiguously demonstrates that the latter based his work on the findings and ideas of the former. In fact, McGregor subdivided Maslow's hierarchy of needs into two large groups claiming that contemporary organisations always favour one of the two groups managing their employees. Theory X managers perceive the needs located at the lower part of Maslow's pyramid as more powerful in motivating the employees; theory Y managers on the contrary believe that needs located at the higher part of the pyramid act as better motivators. However, it will be a mistake to state that McGregor simply plagiarised Maslow's ideas. The major problem with Maslow's hierarchy of needs was the following. Being an outstanding theoretician Maslow created his theory based almost entirely on his brilliant intuition. His experimental data could hardly be called rigid or convincing and the scientist himself was perfectly aware of this drawback. Therefore, despite extreme importance of his ideas for development of psychological science he did not in fact manage to create and properly justify a solid theory with adequate empirical basis. At the same time Maslow formulated foundations of a new integrative approach in psychology - humanistic psychology. Maslow's scheme is an ordinal scale - not amenable to being quantified. It has value only as a heuristic abstraction or a general idea which represents a great analytic interest but remains descriptive in its nature. Maslow's theory seems to be weak on exact points of transition. You can (and he does) for illustrative purposes speak of someone being 85% satisfied in physiological needs, for instance, but as one can see there isn't a test that provides a quantified measure of gratification across needs (Fedorko, 1986). On the contrary, McGregor paid more attention to empirical justification value of his views. As a result, he managed to create a model successfully used to define the type of organisational culture and management. The best evidence of McGregor's success in this is the fact that theory X and theory Y are still commonly used in management and motivation studies. Despite a number of recent publications questioning its rigidity, McGregor's X-Y model can still be addressed as a valid foundation from which managers can successfully develop effective styles and techniques of managing people in business and non-business organisations. McGregor's model is especially important in modern marine management practice due to one very important consideration. Managing educated professionals with highly specific knowledge a very difficult task, and such professionals will constitute the core of the new Government proposed organisation: the complexity of marine resources does not leave any other option to consider but to rely on such professionals. The style of management plays a very important role in whether the managers will be able to fulfil it or not. Although McGregor argues that both X and Y theories can be effective under certain circumstances: in some organisations theory X managers may be more successful than their theory Y counterparts, and visa versa. Effectiveness of the management style directly depends on the type of organisation and nature of work performed. Theory Y managers seems to be the best solution for marine industry largely because managing highly skilled professionals and keeping them motivated implies their active involvement in the process of making decisions related to their very specific work. The involvement provides them with the sense of belongingness to work and they demonstrate more commitment in performing their duties. However, Y theory also has one essential limitation: active involvement of the subordinates in the process of decision making, coupled with lack of strict control often produces a deceptive impression that the manager adopts a laissez-faire attitude and simply does not perform his direct functions, namely controlling. Consequently, theory Y managers must have the ability to balance on the verge between managing and actual laissez-faire attitude. References Beardwell, I., Claydon, T., & Holden, L. 2003, Human Resource Management: A Contemporary Approach, 4th Edition, Financial Times Management.. Drucker, P. F. 1993, Management: Tasks Responsibilities Practices, Harperbusiness. Fedorko, L. (Ed.) 1986, Understanding Psychology, 4th edition, Random House. McGregor, D. 1960, The Human Side of Enterprise, McGraw Hill Higher Education. Maslow, A. 1971, The farther reaches of human nature, New-York: Harper and Row. Maslow, A. 1987, Motivation and personality, 3rd edition, New-York: Harper and Row. Schultz, D. P. & Schultz, S. E. 2004, A History of Modern Psychology, 8th edition, Thomson/Wadsworth. Schultz, D & Schultz, S. 2002, Psychology and Work Today: An Introduction to Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 8th edition, New York, Prentice. Taylor, F. W. 1911, The Principles of Scientific Management, New York: Harper and Row [available online at http://melbecon.unimelb.edu.au/het/taylor/sciman.htm]. Read More