Mcgregors Theories X and Y

Compare McGregors hypothesis X and Theory Y style of leaders and consider the types of organizations in which each style of leadership power be most appropriate. Douglas McGregor contemplated his concept of Theory X and Theory Y in the USA in the 1950s using a survey of coach-and-fours, which he then proposed in his book, The Human Side of effort in the 1960s. Theory X states that a animal trainer distrusts his subordinates, believes they dont enjoy conk out and thence must be controlled.Theory Y, on the separate hand, speculates that a manager believes their employees enjoy tend and wish to contribute, the manager is at that placefore to a greater extent liable(predicate) to include them in the decision making care for and employ a more democratic style of leadership (Marcousse 2003). The dickens theories are not opposite ends of one spectrum, but rather twain separate lines of continuum that describes the attitude and perception a manager has of their employees. The t ype of pauperism that the employees receive from their manager is down to their management style.These Theories match up with Maslows Hierarchy of Needs. McGregor makes the point that the way in which a manager runs and controls his team has massive impacts on the happiness in employees, relating to esteem and self actualisation. These are two factors of motivation mentioned by Maslow in his theory. In study these two theories, X and Y, we must take into account distinct factors that whitethorn affect the two ideas and how they may do so in variant scenarios or places of work.The general idea is that Theory Y is the path of the learn manager (Chapman 1995) who runs a democratic act of leadership, and that it receives better results than theory X, whose manager employs more of an autocratic dictatorship. However this cannot always be believed. In different scales a manager may do better in his work to tell employees the best and most effective way to complete a task, knowing through experience. FW Taylor (1856-1917) believed in efficiency and complete control of a task provided to the manager.This idea related to such(prenominal) methods as the assembly line, a process broken down into simple tasks and completed individually by a group of workers along a line. Employed by such companies as Ford in the early 1900s, in producing cars, this method gave majuscule results, however keeping workers motivated was difficult, part of Taylors method was to devise a pay scheme to reward those who complete or lam tough output targets, but penalize those who cannot, or will not, pass the productivity Taylor believed was possible. (pg 218) For the manager, Theory X is a self fulfilling method, the workers are likely to develop a lack in interest in their work and do it solely for the wage (Marcousse 2003). There are two scenarios in which Theory X can escape a degree of admonition for producing a lack of motivation from its workers(Marcousse 2003). The part peri od worker has partly already given in to the idea that they will not be receiving much independence and delegation of responsibility.This is due to the amount of clip they get committed to their work. For example, a part time tribute guard might be asked to stand guard on a gate for an arcminute every morning to let personnel through, however once they concur completed this task they are unlikely to achieve much more than changing the channel on their TV. The job simply requires a twosome of eyes at one point in the morning, and the rest of the time they are simply on call.There is no enjoyment or form of learning with this job the part time worker is simply there to take home some money at the end of the month, agreeable his basic needs for financial security, a mutual down the stairsstanding amid employer and employee. A large majority of the time there is little for the security guard to watch over. When something does arise that requires more attention, someone of high er liberty is only a phone call away.In this, theory X is the formal management style, as to use theory Y would mean a greater chance of mistakes being made by someone who doesnt come the same experience and qualifications as the elected official. The other scenario is in a moment of chaos (Marcousse 2003). At this point, due to the limited time scale in such moments, someone needs to take full-of-the-moon control and make quick decisive decisions. Such a case is easily understood when put into the confines of an army unit under fire.Someone must give direct orders to keep the enemy under squelch and move their men to preventative, or face either death or capture. Theory Y would consume too much time to take care to all possible ideas and make a decision, with young men who have been trained to take orders rather than come up with them. Efficiency is the headstone in this scenario, Taylor would be completely right in giving natural control to a senior soldier to try and ensu re the safety of his soldiers. Encouraging an employee to work for a great amount of time during the week or without the threat of danger