McGregor's Theories - Assignment Example

McGregor and Maslow Distinguish between and discuss McGregors Theories and Maslow ‘hierarchy of needs’ inrelation to modern marine management practice. Introduction McGregor and Maslow are both important to students of management since they have presented theories which are valuable as far as motivation and management of individuals are concerned. In fact, these theories also become important for students of psychology, sociology and organizational behaviour since their applicability does not end with the study of management alone. To better understand how their theories are applicable to modern marine management, it would be best to examine them individually and then show their applicability to management practices with relevant examples. Maslow Any marine management company would like to keep individuals working for the company engaged and motivated in their work. However, the process of engaging individuals as well as providing the motivation to all concerned parties is not an easy one since motivation is based on several different facets depending on the needs of the individual. Understanding this process of motivation requires careful management, a view of the psychological contract and understanding the work-life balance which prevents employees from burning out (Erdogan, 2005). In terms of individual motivation, people who are better able to create and understand abstract motivational symbols for themselves will have better responses to both internal and external factors that help in the process of motivation (Brown, 1999). For instance, the symbol of money can be understood by any civilization which has a basic economy but the idea of pleasure and other higher order needs may vary from individual to individual. The same is the case with the idea of pain; therefore, an individual may not seek out pleasure or avoid pain in a rational way if they are not clear about the symbolic value of these concepts or if the symbolic connections for the individual are completely different as compared to the ideas upheld by the world around them (Weiner, 1992). In that scenario, the humanistic theory can applied to the concept of motivating individuals towards better performance since it takes a baseline of needs which all human beings have. Maslow is considered to be the authority when it comes to applying the Humanistic perspective to motivation. The central contribution made by Maslow deals with the pyramid of needs which was described by him to show the hierarchy of motivational factors for human beings (Maslow, 1971). The first level of needs that have to be satisfied for an individual are physiological, i.e. Oxygen, nourishment, warmth and other necessities which are required for simple biological existence. The second level of needs is safety and security, the third level represents the social needs of acceptance and belonging to a group. The fourth is the need to be appreciated and held in high esteem by the society around the individual. Even if a human being is placed in danger and has to satisfy needs of the second order, the motivation for moving out of danger will not come from the source of the danger but rather from the intrinsic needs pattern of the individual (Maslow, 1971). The basic needs architecture based on the four primary needs was further expanded with the addition of several other motivating factors which represent cognitive needs for exploration/knowledge, aesthetic needs for the appreciation of beauty, self actualization needs for the fulfillment of a person’s potential and finally the state of self transcendence which helps a person connect with others on a much deeper level (Maslow, 1971). For management purposes, the needs of a person that are on the lower levels must be satisfied before needs on higher levels can be met. As per the ideas given by Maslow, motivation comes when a person is given the ability of going from one level to the next and the individual has the desire to move up on the chain which links parts of his/her motivation (Maslow, 1971). At any time, if a deficiency is present at any lower point of the needs architecture, the person would be motivated to remove that gap and get back to the state that they were in prior to the creation of the need (Huitt, 2001). For example, a seaman who is seeking a promotion will be motivated to work harder than others since he knows that with the promotion comes the satisfaction of the higher order of needs which would remain unfulfilled without him/her working towards certain goals. This theory is certainly more applicable in relation to the rational pursuit of pleasure and the avoidance of pain since Maslow’s source of motivation is clearly intrinsic. If a marine company makes certain targets available to the personnel working for the company, it becomes the task of the individual to motivate him/herself towards seeking out those goals and sticking with the company believing that the company will uphold its end of the bargain. For example, if a company says that length of service will determine the criteria for financial bonuses as well as promotions to higher grades then the time spent with the company is the only measure for rewards and that can be quite damaging to the organization. Maslow’s hierarchy of needs is best used for motivation when there are actual targets that can be given in terms of revenue generated for the company or other factors that can help individuals understand how real world performance can result in real benefits for themselves. At the same time, the company can use motivation through the hierarchy of needs to convince individuals to improve their performance or they could be put in a position where the satisfaction of their basic needs could be put in jeopardy. For example, at GE, rewards are given for excellent performance and poor performance causes a termination of service letter to be delivered to the employee. Rewards and motivation becomes an intrinsic part of the management system at GE and the rewards for individuals who gave superior performance are significant and are publicly announced to their colleagues and co-workers (Kerr, 1996). Talking about the reward system at GE, Welch (2005) reports that, “We publicly rewarded people who drove the [company] mission and let go of people who couldn’t deal with it for whatever reason (Welch, 2005, Pg. 16)”. In relation to Maslow’s pyramid of needs, the idea of publicly rewarding top performers rationally ensures that those who see it happen know why those individuals are being rewarded. At the same time, it allows those individuals getting the reward to attain their higher order needs of public appreciation from their peers. Additionally, the individuals who are publically rewarded would have a difficult time in giving up their loyalty to the company by leaving the company and their commitment to the company would only be strengthened through public appreciation and the satisfaction of their social acceptance needs. At the same time, others who see the rewards being given will also be motivated to work harder and get the same level of recognition and appreciation. This idea leads us to McGregor’s Theory X and Theory Y since that also deals with other individuals in relation to motivation and management. McGregor A marine company’s operations can come across as being closer to Theory X of management as compared to Theory Y depending on several factors. Theory X and Theory Y are two management styles which were given by Douglas McGregor as a part of his study on management. Theory X of management assumes that individuals dislike work and must be handled by strong means if they are to remain productive in a given position. Further, people need strong direction and should not be given independence at work (NetMBA, 2005). Theory Y is the complete opposite of Theory X since Theory Y suggests that people are naturally inclined towards work as they are inclined towards play and rest. Moreover, under Theory Y people find their personal satisfaction in work and will use their imagination, utmost creativity and their all their other personal skills to solve the given work related problems if they are allowed by the management to work as they please (NetMBA, 2005). However, since marine companies may operate in several different locations, it could be possible for a marine company to use different management methodologies depending on the nature of its operations. For example, McGregor suggests that assembly line setups and other situation where the work is broken down into specialised units should benefit from using Theory X for managing workers. At the same time, departments within the company where creativity, independent thinking and individual managerial input is more important than total management control could be benefited if they focused on the principles of Theory Y (NetMBA, 2005). For example, when Theory Y is being used, policies such as the grievance and disciplinary policies have to be more informal and it would be unlikely that the actual rules and regulations could be invoked in practice within the company. However, with some marine companies using Theory X there could be a need for formalised action on the complaint made by an employee (Mullins, 2004). Formal authority coming from the higher levels of management can always remain the source of power in a marine company under Theory Y but some levels of authority have to be given to the people working as line managers since independence is highly valued with Theory Y (Beardwell & Holden, 2004). In fact in certain cases, Theory X becomes more important than Theory Y particularly where legal requirements have to be followed in the transport industry and any lax behaviour by the employees could result in strict legal action against the company. This is because there are legal requirements that are created by various governments in terms of how marine companies can and should respond to certain issues with regard to employee discipline. For instance, an issue which an employee has regarding sexual harassment or a grievance concerning racial discrimination regarding promotions can easily turn into a legal problem for the company. Such problems can not only cost the company a lot of money, but also a lot in terms of reputation as being a good employer is always important in the marine business. The informality of a company created with Theory Y in terms of management policies does not mean that a company should simply ignore the issues it faces in terms of employee performance, discipline or insubordination. The idea of informality is only useful if the middle managers and the general environment of the company push the idea of all employers acting as mentors and strong supporters of those who are followers. As explained by Byrne (1998): “Making the company informal means violating the chain of command, communicating across layers, paying people as if they worked not for a big company but for a demanding entrepreneur where nearly everyone knows the boss (Byrne, Pg. 1, 1998)”. Of course the choice of running a company under Theory X or Theory Y remains up to the individual who is managing the company but the selection of one or the other depends on the situation of the company as well as the business requirements of the organisation. In fact, a marine company may even take parts of both theories to create something which is entirely their own and thus have a mixture of Theory X and Theory Y to govern its employees. In either case, the selection of one theory or the mixture of the two will create the culture of the company which can be very difficult to change once it has been established therefore the choice must always be made with care and deliberation. Conclusion Both theorists and their representative theories of motivation seem to be quite useful in the modern business environment and it is clear that many successful companies have used the techniques, as well as the theories given by them concerning individual motivation. In comparing the two it becomes clear that McGregor’s theory is more connected with the culture and the structure of an organisation as compared to Maslow’s. With McGregor, motivation comes from the company itself rather than the individual who is seeking out higher positions and higher levels of satisfaction. On the other hand, Maslow’s ideas about motivating individuals remain deeply connected with the internal drive that people have to succeed and become better than who they are at the present moment. Perhaps the best application of internal motivation as suggested by Maslow as well as the external forces of culture and organisational leanings as discussed by McGregor would come when these theories are applied in tandum. It becomes easy to say that both theorists and their ideas remain important for modern business enterprises since their ideas appeal to common sense and their practical application is also evident for those who use these theories. Works Cited Beardwell, I. and Holden, L. 2004, Human Resource Management: a contemporary approach, FT Prentice Hall. Brown, K. 1999. ‘Social Cognitive Theory’, [Online] Available at: http://hsc.usf.edu/~kmbrown/Social_Cognitive_Theory_Overview.htm Byrne, J. 1998, ‘How Jack Welch Runs GE: A Close-up Look at How Americas #1 Manager Runs GE’, [Online] Available at: http://www.businessweek.com/1998/23/b3581001.htm Erdogan, B. 2005, ‘Enhancing Career Benefits of Employee’s Proactive Personality’, Personnel Psychology, vol. 58, no. 4, pp. 859-891. Huitt, W. 2001, ‘Motivation to learn: An overview’, [Online] Available at: http://chiron.valdosta.edu/whuitt/col/motivation/motivate.html Kerr, S. 1996, ‘Risky business: The new pay game’, Fortune, vol. 134, no. 2, pp. 94-97. Maslow, A. 1971. The farther reaches of human nature. The Viking Press. Mullins, L. 2004, Management & Organisational Behaviour, Pitman publishing. NetMBA. 2005, ‘Theory X and Theory Y’, Internet Center for Management and Business Administration [Online] Available at: http://www.netmba.com/mgmt/ob/motivation/mcgregor/ Weiner, B. 1992. Human Motivation: Metaphors, Theories, and Research. SAGE Publishers. Welch, J. 2005, Winning, HarperCollins. Read More