1980s brought a rampant “merger mania”; then there was the inflation and subsequent bursting. Integrity and trust as business tools? Douglas McGregor described the importance of trust. Download ebook motivasi dan pengembangan diri gratis 2016 new sedan cars. Theory X leaders believe employees need to be. Download fulltext PDF. Thinking should merge more with. A two-part BNA Video entitled “Theory X and Theory Y: The Work of Douglas McGregor” created with. Theory X and Theory Y represent two sets of assumptions about human nature and human behavior that are relevant to the practice of management.
Sorry, but copying text is forbidden on this website! Critically evaluate McGregor’s Theory X and Theory Y. How far is it applicable to management and employee motivation in contemporary Chinese organizations? In the modern corporation environment, employees’ motivation plays a pivotal role, thus they should be recognised as a significant part of corporations’ financial assets. There are several distinct viewpoints of approaches to managerial strategies about motivating employees, one of which is McGregor’s Theory X and Theory Y. It proposes that providing an autonomous environment satisfying employees’ higher needs is more preferable than simply controlling them by rewards and punishment. This essay will firstly evaluate McGregor’s theory.
Although influential value of this theory in organization history might be approved, there are two primary issues, invalidity and superficial recognition, which criticisms revolve around. Subsequently, this essay will discuss the extent of this theory’s application in Chinese organizations. Although McGregor’s theory may be employed in few corporations, this theory is generally not applicable in most contemporary Chinese organizations. Many theorists support that McGregor’s theory considers the field of management from a new angle, indicating a strong influential value.
In contrast to the principles of conventional management mentioned as Theory X, the advocated Theory Y illuminated a cluster of new or redefined concepts such as self-fulfilling prophecy and responsibility. According to Carson (2005), some of those concepts had been interpreted before; however, McGregor’s theory combined those concepts emerging from separate theories. Based on these compiled conceptions, this theory takes higher-order needs into consideration, which innovatively introduces a profound work value that management should not only involve controlling and monitoring. Moreover, the inclination to responsibility of employees contributes to participative atmospheres in working environment. Lerner (2011) claims that McGregor’s theory can prepare employees’ skills to tackle complicated tasks due to their sense of responsibility, in parallel with improving the potential of an individual. Therefore, this theory, revealing an initial pattern of management strategy, dramatically influences the applied field of organization development.
In spite of the influence and originality of McGregor’s theory, there is a primary drawback of the validity, which is regarding the assumption of human nature in this theory. This theory is primarily based on an analysis of human nature. McGregor (2000) has pointed out that theory X management assumes that people generally are not responsible for work in contrast to theory Y assuming that people are invariably self-controlled. However, the theory X assumption is exaggeratedly negative while the theory Y assumption is overly optimistic. According to Bobic and Davis (2003), there is no evidence that systematically certifies the existence of individuals’ extreme attitudes towards work. Similarly, Francesco and Gold (2005) argued that human nature is not viewed purely positive or negative in all the cultures, drawing on Hofstede’s theory. Furthermore, different employees may have somewhat different characteristics; however, McGregor blended those sophisticated human natures into two simplistic models to introduce a quite deficient theory.
Therefore, the theory seems to be invalid due to this relatively unrealistic and inadequate analysis. In addition to the invalid assumption of McGregor’s theory, there is another drawback concerning superficial recognition of autonomous environment and authority which are primary principles of Theory Y and Theory X respectively. McGregor (2000) state that autonomous environment can be acquired by opportunities for self-actualization. Nonetheless, Head (2011) has argued that incentives involving self-actualization are barely effective. Likewise, Bobic and Davis (2003) state that self-actualization is not a pragmatic motivational factor due to the rare opportunity provided by corporations in reality.