Theory “X” and “‘Y’ / Leadership styles / Grapevine communication and its utility
1. Theory ‘X’ and ‘Y’
Douglas McGregor was a well-known psychologist. He propounded two contrasting theories of human behaviour which he called theory X and theory Y. These theories contain two pairs of assumptions about human beings which McGregar thought were implied by the actions of autocratic and permissive managers. It may be noted that these sets of assumptions are merely intuitive deductions they are not based on any research studies.
Theory X
Theory X indicates the traditional approach to managerial motivation and control. It represents old stereotyped and authoritarian management style of motivation. The underlying assumptions of this theory are as follows
() The average human being is basically lazy and has an inherent dislike to work. He will avoid work, if he can.
(ii) Most people lack ambition. They are not interested in achievement. They like to be directed
(iii) Most people have little capacity for creativity in solving organisational problems.
(iv) Most people are indifferent to the organisational goals.
(v) Most people must be closely controlled and often threatened to achieve organisational goals.
(vi) Motivation of average human beings occurs at the physiological (food, clothing, shelter, etc.) and safety levels.
These negative assumptions of human behaviour underlie the traditional mechanisation of people and processes. The world is supposed to be full of unskilled workers, peons and messengers and to manage them is largely a matter of vigilance and strict supervision. Management merely thinks of catering to their physical and safety needs with some fringe benefits, keeping the implied threat of punishment handy in case of need. Thus, carrot and stick approach to motivation is followed. Theory X suggests that threats of punishment and strict control are the ways to manage people. It was practised during the days the Scientific Management approach gained prominence and human beings were treated like machines.
The above assumptions have been challenged by the human relationists because employees are treated merely as a commodity or passive factor of production. McGregar questioned the assumptions of Theory X which followed carrot and stick approach to motivation of people and suggested autocratic style of leadership. He felt that management by direction and control is a questionable method for motivating such people whose physiological and safety needs have been satisfied and whose social, esteem and self-actualisation needs are important. In his own words, “The ‘carrot and stick’ theory of motivation which go along with Theory X works reasonably well under certain circumstances. The means for satisfying man’s physiological and (within limits) safety needs can be provided or withheld by management. Employment itself is such a means, and so are wages, working conditions, and benefits. By these means, the individual can be controlled so long as he is struggling for subsistence. Man tends to live for bread alone when there is little bread. But the ‘carrot and stick’ theory does not work at all once the man has reached an adequate subsistence level and after that he is motivated primarily by higher levels needs.
Theory Y
After challenging the validity of Theory X, McGregar developed an alternative theory of human behaviour which is known as Theory Y.
This theory assumes that people are not unreliable and lazy by nature. If they are properly motivated, they could really be creative. The main task of the management is to unleash. the potential in the employees. An employee who is properly motivated can achieve his goals by directing his own efforts and, thus, he can help in accomplishing the organisational goals. The assumptions of McGregor’s Theory Y are as follows:
(i) Work is as natural as play, if the conditions are favourable. The average person does not inherently dislike work.
(ii) External control and threat of punishment are not the only means for bringing about efforts towards organisational objectives. The average human being will exercise self-direction and self-control in the service of objectives to which he is committed.
(iii) Commitment to objectives is a function of the rewards associated with their achievement. The most significant of such rewards, e.g. the efforts towards organisation objectives.
(iv) The average human being learns under proper conditions, not only to accept but also to seek responsibility. Avoidance of responsibility, lack of ambition and emphasis on security are generally are consequences of experience, not inherent in human characteristics.
(v) The capacity to exercise a relatively high degree of imagination, ingenuity and creativity in the solution of organisational problems is widely, not narrowly, distributed in the population.
(vi) The intellectual potentialities of the average human being are only partially utilised under the conditions of modern industrial life.
Theory Y assumes that goals of the organisation and those of the individuals are not necessarily incongruent. The basic problem in most of the organisation is that of securing commitment of workers to organisational goals. Workers’ commitment is directly related to the satisfaction of their needs. Thus, this theory places emphasis on satisfaction of the needs of the workers. It does not rely heavily on the use of authority as an instrument of command and control. It assumes that workers exercise self-direction and self-control in the direction of the goals to which they feel themselves committed. Because of these reasons, Theory Y’ is realistic and frequently used at different levels in most of the organisations.
In support of the assumptions embodied in ‘Theory Y, McGregar cited a few practices wherein the subordinates are given a freedom to direct their activities, to assume responsibility and, importantly, to satisfy their egoistic needs. These practices include decentralisation and delegation, job enlargement, participation and consultative management, and management by objectives.
3. Grapevine Communication and its Utility: A rumour is the information without any secure standard of evidence. Grapevine information is incomplete and, therefore, people add their personal interpretations. As a result, the information gets distorted and may be misinterpreted. A rumour is an undesirable feature of grapevine. It is an untrue part of the grapevine. Rumours tend to change as they pass from one person to another. An outbreak of rumours may be dangerous for the organisation. Therefore, the management must be very careful in dealing with rumours. Management should not allow rumours to spread. In case a rumour comes to the knowledge of management, it should take steps to stop it spreading further. It should inform people of the real facts regarding the issue covered by the rumour. Managers cannot completely eliminate grapevine but they can take steps to minimise the damages it can cause. They can identify the important people in the grapevine to partially control the flow of grapevine.
