Mc Gregors Theory X and Theory Y MGMT

Mc. Gregor’s Theory X and Theory Y MGMT 500 – Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management Group 1: Heather Moore, Jessica Smiley, Heidi Stein, & George Tolle

Overview • Early Development • Mc. Gregor’s Influence • Critiques of Theory X and Theory Y • Situational Leadership • Performance Readiness • Styles • Comparisons • Beliefs

Early Development Theory X Assumptions Theory Y Assumptions • Hard work only comes when people are threatened or controlled • Prefers to be directed • Abhors responsibility • Managed with punishment and tight controls • Physical and mental efforts are natural • Workers will be selfdirected if given clear organizational goals • Seeks responsibility • Large number of employees capable of solving problems

Mc. Gregor’s Influence • Revolutionized leadership abilities could be taught • Manager’s primary obligation – Cause subordinates to perform at their best • Diversity should be embraced • Predicted development of group-based management

Critiques of Theory X and Y • What is a theory? • Idea, not proven to be true • Always critiqued on validity • Theory X/Y unproven • No systematic research • More research should be accomplished on managerial assumptions • Theory X/Y used in: • Academic research • Among practitioners • Business school curriculums

Situational Leadership – Performance Readiness • Situational leadership performance readiness has four categories of the follower Readiness level 1 – Unable and insecure (unwilling) Readiness level 2 – Unable but confident (willing) Readiness level 3 – Able but Insecure (unwilling) Readiness level 4 – Able and Confident (willing)

Theory X & Performance Readiness What type of Situational leadership performance readiness would best suite Mc. Gregor’s theory x style? • Readiness level 1 – Unable and insecure (unwilling) • Readiness level 2 – Unable but confident (willing)

Theory Y & Performance Readiness What type of situational leadership performance readiness would best suite Mc. Gregor’s Theory Y style? • Readiness level 3 – Able but Insecure (unwilling) • Readiness level 4 – Able and Confident(willing)

Situational Leadership Styles • S 1 – Telling/Directing • S 2 - Selling/Coaching • S 3 - Participating/Supporting • S 4 – Delegating/Empowering

Theory Y Success Story • Procter & Gamble • New manufacturing facility in Atlanta, Georgia, setup using Theory Y concept in mid-1950’s • Facility was 30% more productive than any other P&G plant by mid-1960’s • Theory Y framework was applied to other plants

Comparison of Mc. Gregor’s X/Y to Situational Leadership Styles Mc. Gregor’s Theory X • Followers are lazy and need direction=S 1 and S 2 style of Situational Leadership Mc. Gregor’s Theory Y • Followers are selfmotivated = S 3 and S 4 style of Situational Leadership

Belief of X versus Y • Are you an X or a Y leader? • Does not determine particular leadership performance • Reasons for the belief: • Good results • Led as a subordinate

Summary • Mc. Gregor was a man before his time • Theory X and Theory Y framework • Situational Leadership

References Carson, C. (n. d). A historical view of Douglas Mc. Gregor's Theory Y. vol. 43, no. 3 (2005), p. 450 -460 Douglas Mc. Gregor’s Theory X and Theory Y (1906 -1964). (n. d. ). Retrieved from Marked by Teachers: http: //markedbyteachers. com/as-andlevel/politics/douglas-mcgregor-s-theory-x-and-theory-y 1906 -1964 -. html Head, T. C. (2011). Douglas Mc. Gregor's legacy: Lessons learned, lessons lost. Journal of Management History, 17(2), 202216. doi: http: //dx. doi. org/10. 1108/17511341111112604 Hindle, T. (2008, October 3). Douglas Mc. Gregor. Retrieved from The Economist: http: //economist. com/node/12366698

References, cont. Kelly, E. P. (2000). Douglas Mc. Gregor, revisited: Managing the human side of the enterprise. The Academy of Management Executive, 14(3), 143 -145. Retrieved from http: //ezproxy. sckans. edu/login? url=http: //search. proqu est. com/docview/210529248? accountid=13979 Kopelman, R. (n. d). Douglas Mc. Gregor's Theory X and Y: Toward a Construct-valid Measure*. vol. 20, no. 2 (Summer 2008), p. 255273 Kopelman, R. E. , Prottas, D. J. , & Falk, D. W. (2012). Further development of a measure of theory x and y managerial assumptions. 24(4), 450 -471 Meeker, S. M. E. (1982). THEORY Y: ANOTHER LOOK. Southern Review of Public Administration (Pre-1986), 5(4), 500. Retrieved from http: //ezproxy. sckans. edu/login? url=http: //search. proquest. co m/docview/211528115? accountid=13979 Merriam-Webster, (2014). Theory. Retrieved from http: //www. merriam-webster. com/dictionary/theory

References, cont. Norris, W. R. , & Vecchio, R. P. (1992). Situational leadership theory A replication. Group & Organization Studies (1986 -1998), 17(3), 331. Retrieved from http: //ezproxy. sckands. edu/login? url=http: //proquest. com/do cview/232776094? accountid=13979 Situational Leadership. (n. d) Retrieved from: http: //mc. edu/rotc/files/9213/1471/9571/MSL_202_L 09 b_Situational_Leadership. pdf Stewart, M. (2010) Mc. Gregor’s Theory x and y revisited. 3(1) Oxford Leadership Journal. Retrieved from: http: //www. oxfordleadership. com/journal/vol 1_issue 3/s tewart. pdf Sund, A. (2012). The antecedents and outcomes of Mc. Gregor’s theory endorsement. Retrieved from https: //learn. sckans. edu/courses/1/MGMT 500 PA 2014 SU MMER 02 PS 2 a/groups/_9492_1//_628433_1/The%20 Ant ecedents%20 and%20 Outcomes%20 of%20 Mc. Gregor%27 s %20 Theory%2