Management Perspectives

Organisations built to stand the test of times would always embrace adaptability. The changing patterns of industry demand a leadership style that not only helps the organisation grow, but also ensures that the employees feel comfortable and connected ceaselessly. The leadership style thus must be dynamic with changing times. The bone of contention always lies within a perfect idea of leadership, that there must be a single way to the apotheosis, albeit the most debated of the ideas. The reality is, a transformational leadership style imbibes within melanges of effective values that set the base for resilient organisations. The paper is an attempt to explore the ideas of Douglas McGregor on Theory X and Theory Y and understand its application and how differing management styles have lasting impacts on the employees working in the organisation.

Theory X
Douglas McGregor ideas on Theory X management style emanated from his earlier works on classical management theory. The roots of Theory X lie in the notion that employees are inherently lazy and will dodge their work whenever they find an opportunity. The onus then lies on the reporting managers to keep the employees in momentum, give them direction, continuously motivate them, or penalise them as the situation demands. This theory proposes that employees lack drive and stay in their comfort zones. Therefore, they require a management system in which they are led and controlled by their supervisors, while being subjected to threats and punishments. Theory X also tends to promote authoritarian leadership style within the organisation which creates a lack of trust among the peer group.

Theory Y
Theory Y is defined as an alternate management principle to Theory X, deemed as a more optimistic leadership approach X. It proposes that employees working in the organisation are not lazy and are always looking for opportunities to upskill and rise up in the hierarchy. It is always for the supervisors to provide the employees with ample freedom and opportunities, so that the latter can align themselves to the company’s vision and achieve organisational goals cohesively.

Contrary to Theory X, Theory Y states that employees dislike lack of freedom and controlled decisionmaking mechanism in the organisation. It also states that employees always look for meaningful work, they look for ways to take responsibility, and if the management provides them with optimum conditions, they excel at work. Theory Y not only builds trust among the employees but also helps build strong decision-making skills. It advocates the idea that every employee is valuable and has his/her say in the organisation’s progress; that every employee has the right to exercise his/her free will and creative independence at work to achieve maximum potential.

Conclusion
Douglas McGregor never expounded upon the two motivational theories with an aim to draw upon a choice between one or another. Both the theories hold their relevance and must be referred to accordingly. No organisation in the world has modelled their management style choosing either Theory X or Theory Y. It is always up to the management to decide how the teams must be led, what actions necessitates success whether being coercive in some situations is the right choice or being compliant is. Differing styles (Theory X or Theory Y) need to be tested and the most effective amongst them must be chosen for efficient management. In any situation, the organisation must not only look for increasing productivity but also ensure that employee well-being is not compromised.

Douglas McGregor never perceived the two theories as canonical laws; he left them open for improvements and improvisation. In his last days he started to work on another theory which was an improved version of Theory X & Y and combined the ideas from both the theories. He called this motivational theory as Theory Z. It was only after his death that William Ouchi elucidated Theory Z by drawing similarities between American style of leadership and Japanese style of leadership. He proposed that organisations should ground their execution in values which is a blend of American and Japanese style of management.

Theory Z promotes not only constant skill refinement of the employees but also advocates fostering long-lasting relationships between them. Employees will only perform better in environments in which they feel secure and safe. Organisations who trust their workers and give them the space to assert their opinions, create such environments. Whether it’s Theory X or Theory Y or Theory Z, management should give a lot of thought before applying any of them, as the outcome will depend not just on the theory, but on its right application