نظریه X و نظریه Y

نظریه x و y از جمله رهیافتهای منابع انسانی به مدیریت است. داگلاس مگ گریگور با تأثیرپذیری شدید از مطالعات هاتورن و نظریه مزلو، در کتاب معروف خود تحت عنوان بعد انسانی سازمان این نظریه را ترویج کرد که مدیران باید توجه بیشتری به نیازهای اجتماعی و خودشکوفایی افراد در محیط کار داشته باشند. مک گریگور در نظریه ای دو ساحتی ئر مورد انسان، برداشتها ، طرز تلقیها و نگرشهای مدیران را در مورد انسان به دو گروه تقسیم کرده است. وی برای اجتناب از پیشداوری افراد در مورد این دو گروه، آنها را با دو حرف x و y مشخص کرده است. به طور کلی مفروضات نظریه x عبارتند از:

1.بیشتر انسانها ذاتاً تنبل و از کار بیزارند؛

2. بیشتر انسانها از قبول مسئولیت گریزانند و ترجیح می دهند که تحت هدایت دیگری قرار گیرند؛
3. برای انگیزش انسانها باید از مشوقهای مادی و اقتصادی و ایجاد امنیت استفاده کرد؛
4. قابلیت خلاقیت و نوآوری برای حل مسائل فقط در تعداد محدودی از افراد یافت می شود که به مشاغل مدیریت و رهبری می پردازند؛
5. بیشتر مردم باید تحت کنترل دقیق قرار گیرند؛ زیرا معمولاً افراد از غلاقه کافی برای کار برخوردار نیستند.

در حالی که مفروضات نظریه y عبارتند از:

1. کار به طور طبیعی مانند بازی است؛
2. معمولاً افراد مسئولیت پذیرند و با اشتیاق به دنبال پذیرش مسئولیت هستند؛
3. اگر افراد به کار خود علاقمند باشند، به طور مناسبی برانگیخته می شوند؛ در واقع احساس رضایت درونی بهترین پاداش برای افراد است و شیوه خود کنترلی مؤثرتر از کنترل توسط دیگران است؛
4. ((قابلیت خلاقیت و نوآوری برای حل مسائل)) به طور طبیعی بین جمعیت انسانها توضیع شده است؛
5. کنترل را می توان به خود افراد واگذار کرد؛ در واقع شیوه خود کنترلی مؤثرتر از کنترل توسط دیگران است.

ویژگیهای سبکهای مورد استفاده مدیران، بر مبنای مفروضات x و y

بر اساس این نظریه، مدیران با توجه به مفروضاتی که در مورد انسان دارند، به هدایت کارکنان می پردازند و سبکی را برای رهبری انتخاب می کنند که متناسب با مفروضات مذکور باشد.
مگ گریگور بر این باور بود که مدیران باید نگرش خود به انسان را بر مبنای مفروضات نظریه y قرار دهند؛ به همین دلیل، آن گروه از مدیران که مفروضاتی مبتنی بر نظریه x دارند را به تغییر مبانی نگرش فرا می خواند.
به نظر وی اگر نگرش مدیر مبتنی بر مفروضات نظریه x باشد، با کارکنان خود نیز با همان نگرش رفتار خواهد کرد؛ از این رو، چنین مدیری از ساز و کارهای کنترل تفصیلی بهره می گیرد و برای ایجاد انگیزه در کارکنان، صرفاً از محرکهای مادی استفاده می کند؛ در حالی که اگر نگرش مدیر مبتنی بر مفروضات نظریهy باشد، می تواند هدفهای فردی و سازمانی را تلفیق کند. چنین مدیری برای تلفیق هدفهای مذکور به کارکنان خود آزادی عمل بیشتری می دهد، خلاقیت و نوآوری را تشویق می کند، کنترل را به حداقل می رساند، و برای جذاب تر کردن کار و ارضای نیازهای سطوح عالی تر کارکنان می کوشد. تحت چنین شرایطی، کارکنان نیز تعهد بیشتری نسبت به سازمان خواهند داشت. البته مک گریگور نیز می دانست که برخی از کارکنان نابالغ، در ابتدای کار به کنترل بیشتری نیاز دارند تا به بلوغ کافی دست یابند و شایستگی آن را پیدا کنند که با آنها بر مبنای نگرش مبتنی بر نظریه y رفتار شود.

Theory X and Theory Y

Edit by: Mahdi Yarahmadi Khorasani

Theory X Propositions

A manager holding to these would be inclined to believe and state that

• On average my staff really do not want to work. if they had a choice they would not want to commit themselves to work for the employer in the employer’s time. They avoid it wherever possible. Basically they are self-interested and prefer leisure rather than working for someone else.
• Because of this I have to structure work and energise my staff. Tasks ned to be well-specified. Even then many need pushing and more direction and control so that they apply adequate effort towards what has to be achieved. Even though I provide good rewards – many of my staff are still disinclined to apply consistently the kinds of effort the organisation needs. Many accept the rewards, complain that they need more and yet behave in ways that are less than fully committed. I have to resort to more checks, instructions and exhortations – sometimes even punishments. If I relax my gaze and I am too soft sloppiness sets in.
• Indeed most people prefer to be directed. They do not really wish to carry the burden of responsibility indeed they tend to avoid this. They have little ambition and prefer a secure, steady life.

Such a manager thus gives close supervision and defines jobs and systems that structure how a worker allocates and applies their time. They place stress on workers being calculative.

The above statements are spin-offs from McGregor’s originals but the sense remains the same. McGregor felt that such managerial views led to behaviours and organisational systems which relied on rewards, promises, incentives, close supervision, rules and regulations, even threats and sanctions all designed to control workers.

Soft X and Hard X

There are soft and hard methods in the Theory X list. Hard approaches are represented by “the stick” – coercive language, harsh authoritarian management. Soft applications- “the carrot” – dangle rewards and promises in front of the employees nose i.e. more pay (cash and non-cash), more work, a fair day’s work for a fair day’s pay. The relationship is a wage-work bargain, an exchange.

Theory Y

A Theory Y manager tends to believe that

• Given the right conditions for employees, their application of physical and mental effort in work is as natural as rest or play. Work is play, offers satisfactions and meaning.
• There are alternatives to reliance on external controls, pushing and threats – implied or real. These are not the only means for linking individual effort with organisational objectives. If people feel committed, they will exercise self-direction and self-control in the service of the firm’s objectives.
• Their objectives will complement the firm’s and commitment is a function of the “intrinsic” rewards associated with their achievement i.e. not just extrinsic rewards/punishments.
• The Theory Y manager recognises the influence of learning. He/she believes that if the right conditions are created the average person learns not to accept and seek responsibility.
• The capacity to exercise imagination, ingenuity and creativity in the solution of organisational problems is widely not narrowly distributed in the work force
• In modern organisations, the intellectual potential of the average person are only partially utilised. People are capable of handling more complex problems.

Again these are (my) extensions to McGregor’s original, sparse propositions.

a more difficult management approach…?

On asking managers which is the most difficult management approach to adopt – will they reply that being a Theory Y manager is more fraught and difficult?

A Theory X communication style can be largely one way. It is quick and orderly. If employees do not respond or deliver the goods – they can be blamed for inattentiveness, lack of interest, unreliability. After all “you just cannot get good staff these days”.

But the Theory Y manager has to be more sensitive. He/she has

• to take the time out to explains
• to comprehend the needs of the individual,
• to engage in joint-problem solving and interpersonal exchange with each member of staff.

This requires trust building (McGregor accepted the need for trust, consistency and faith. If a member of staff lets the manager down, the latter cannot revert in a knee-jerk way to a Theory X monster – blaming or criticising. Such swings characterise the Jekyll and Hyde manager. The punishing parent who then returns to nurturing may not be believed.

Theory Y and Abdication

Theory Y is the opposite of abdication, giving staff licence to interpret and implement organisational objectives themselves. The manager remains at the centre facilitating the initiation and control processes. Essential to the Theory Y culture is a monitoring, feedback and control system.

A Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing

Mechanisms of management control remain key ingredients in Theory Y propositions – to the extent that analysts such as Salaman (1981) see Theory Y as a glossy, re-formulation of Theory X. The extra, consumer-oriented ingredient is its humanistic ethic – the purpose of which is to capture worker motivation and groom higher performance.

The Manager as Developer

Theory X and Y both have it that managers are responsible for organising the elements of the production process, getting workers to co-operate and align with organisational goals. A developer and facilitator role – setting up and targeting social, technical system performances – mediates down-side of the controller function. Managers set the parameters but work systematically and conscientiously with junior staff defining jobs and priorities, planning operations and agreeing programmes, reviewing achievements.

Empowerment – the Emperor’s New Clothes

Theory Y recommended what Herzberg in 1964 called “job enrichment” and Peters in 1982 and 1985 called “empowerment “. Re-designing jobs to expand opportunities for self-control and self-direction would, it was stressed, contribute to improved performance. Even though the maintenance aspects of the controller’s role are retained, the manager was encouraged to remove job restrictions and create more scope for job development enabling employees to grow and give more of their innate potential to the business.

Conclusion

The McGregor Message?

Use Theory Y principles to shape your organisation’s culture and management style! “.