Assembly Lines

Week Two

 It’s fairly safe to say that most people, including McGregor, thought Theory Y was the best management style; but that doesn’t mean there is no place for Theory X, right?

According to Rich Bayer, there can be a place for both theories. For example, Theory X would work well for a company that uses assembly lines. “For these types of jobs, there’s a need to set quotas and have fairly strict guidelines with little margin for error” (Bayer 1). They also just need repetition and not a constant change of work methods.

Then there are jobs that need the employees to be creative and problem solving sills like in research and advertising. Because these employees need more room to think and thrive, the more flexible Theory Y would work well for them (Bayer 2).

But there is some evidence that from the view of psychological health, the Y Theory approach could benefit all employees and many different job settings. (Bayer 2)

According to Bayer:

“Theory Y managers boost job satisfaction by treating employees with dignity and respect. A Theory Y manager can even boost job satisfaction among employees whose jobs are routine and do not present a high degree of mental challenge. With such employees, a manager can improve satisfaction by giving them additional responsibilities that make the work more challenging or by helping them understand how their personal goals actually match company goals” (2).

We could use Ford as an example of an assembly line company that flourished from the Y Theory. For 17 years before the lat 1990s, Ford Motor Company used the slogan, “Quality is job one” (Bayer 2). This slogan didn’t only help boost sales against the foreign automobile market, but also boosted the morale of the employees. “It gave Ford employees a company goal that could match their personal goals” (Bayer 2). This change I management lead to the improvement of Ford cars and trucks for many years to come.

Work Cited:

Bayer, Rich. "Employee Management: Are You X or Are You Y." Upper Bay Counseling and Support Services, Inc. (2004): 1-2. Web. 27 Oct. 2013. <http://www.upperbay.org/DO%20NOT%20TOUCH%20-%20WEBSITE/articles/employee%20management.pdf>.

Intro Into X & Y Theory

Week One

Starting this project, I felt that it was most important for me to first look more in depth on McGregor’s X & Y theory before I started comparing and applying it to mine and other’s experiences. Like for any other research project, I started by simply typing, “X and Y conflict theory” into Google and clicked on the first hit on the page, just expecting it to be a definition of the theory. While reading the very intriguing article, "X and Y, Revisited" by Matthew Stewart, I started to realize, of course, that there was much more to the theory than just in our textbooks. To make things as short and sweet as possible (for the sake of boring you) I wrote down what points made that I found were most interesting. But before I get into those, I’d first like to make sure we know the basic differences between X and Y.

In McGregor’s influential book, published in 1960, he claims that there are “two competing theories about human nature that dominant the managerial thought world*” (Stewart 1). One of them, theory X, enforces the belief that humans are lazy and self-centered, unmotivated, don’t encourage change, and want to be told what to do. It’s said that this theory requires managers to use fear and pain to motivate employees (Stewart 2). The Y theory supports the idea that human beings are “active rather than passive shapers of themselves and of their environment. They long to grow and assume responsibility”. This means authorities need to manage them as little as possible so they can meet their fullest potential (Stewart 2).

Now that we have the basic understanding of the X & Y Theory, I will leave you with just a few of the following points made in the article that I found important to point out.

• Obviously theory Y is a good thing and almost always the most popular of the two. It's also great McGregor made to known to managers, so companies can start moving out of the overly harsh management that once was thought to be the most successful way of controlling employees. But does using the Y theory always result in an absolute "happy ending?" And what faults could we possibly find in this theory?

• Some of the "most successful companies in the world are routinely rated the best to work" because they have applied the Y theory into their management; but is this success because most of these companies are worth billions and can afford this (Stewart 2)? Or is it possible that any company, large or small revenue, has the ability to be successful with the Y theory?

• According to Stewart, the McGregor's theory isn't "about the distinction between theories of human nature, but between theories about the nature of human relations - or in less confusing jargon - the sources of human conflict."Stewart renames these U and T theories (Stewart 3). 

Work Cited:
Stewart, Matthew. "X and Y, Revisited." Oxford Leadership Journal 1.3 (2010): 1-5. Web. 20 Oct. 2013. <http://www.oxfordleadership.com/journal/vol1_issue3/stewart.pdf>.