McGregor’s Theory X and Theory Y MGMT 500 – Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management Group 1: Heather Moore, Jessica Smiley, Heidi Stein,

McGregor’s Theory X and Theory Y

MGMT 500 – Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

Group 1: Heather Moore, Jessica Smiley, Heidi Stein, & George Tolle

Overview

• Early Development•McGregor’s Influence• Critiques of Theory X and Theory Y• Situational Leadership• Performance Readiness• Styles• Comparisons• Beliefs

Early Development

Theory X Assumptions• Hard work only comes

when people are threatened or controlled• Prefers to be directed• Abhors responsibility• Managed with

punishment and tight controls

Theory Y Assumptions• Physical and mental

efforts are natural• Workers will be self-

directed if given clear organizational goals• Seeks responsibility• Large number of

employees capable of solving problems

McGregor’s Influence

• Revolutionized leadership abilities could be taught•Manager’s primary obligation – Cause

subordinates to perform at their best• Diversity should be embraced• Predicted development of group-based

management

Critiques of Theory X and Y

• What is a theory?• Idea, not proven to be true• Always critiqued on validity

• Theory X/Y unproven • No systematic research

• More research should be accomplished on managerial assumptions• Theory X/Y used in:• Academic research• Among practitioners• Business school curriculums

Situational Leadership – Performance Readiness

• Situational leadership performance readiness has four categories of the follower

Readiness level 1 – Unable and insecure (unwilling)Readiness level 2 – Unable but confident (willing)Readiness level 3 – Able but Insecure (unwilling)Readiness level 4 – Able and Confident (willing)

Theory X & Performance Readiness

What type of Situational leadership performance readiness would best suite McGregor’s theory x style?

• Readiness level 1 – Unable and insecure (unwilling)• Readiness level 2 – Unable but confident (willing)

Theory Y & Performance Readiness

What type of situational leadership performance readiness would best suite McGregor’s Theory Y style?

• Readiness level 3 – Able but Insecure (unwilling)• Readiness level 4 – Able and Confident(willing)

Situational Leadership Styles

• Situational Leadership Styles• S1 – Telling/Directing• S2 - Selling/Coaching• S3 - Participating/Supporting• S4 – Delegating/Empowering

Theory Y Success Story

• Procter & Gamble • New manufacturing facility in Atlanta, Georgia, setup using

Theory Y concept in mid-1950’s• Facility was 30% more productive than any other P&G plant by

mid-1960’s• Theory Y framework was applied to other plants

Comparison of McGregor’s X/Y to Situational Leadership Styles

McGregor’s Theory X• Followers are lazy and

need direction=S1 and S2 style of Situational Leadership

McGregor’s Theory Y• Followers are self-

motivated = S3 and S4 style of Situational Leadership

Belief of X versus Y

• Are you an X or a Y leader?• Does not determine particular leadership performance • Reasons for the belief:• Good results• Led as a subordinate

Summary

•McGregor was a man before his time• Theory X and Theory Y framework• Situational Leadership

ReferencesCarson, C. (n.d). A historical view of Douglas McGregor's Theory

Y. vol. 43, no. 3 (2005), p. 450-460Douglas McGregor’s Theory X and Theory Y (1906-1964). (n.d.). Retrieved from Marked by Teachers: http://markedbyteachers.com/as-and- level/politics/douglas-mcgregor-s-theory-x-and-theory-y- 1906-1964-.htmlHead, T. C. (2011). Douglas McGregor's legacy: Lessons learned, lessons lost. Journal of Management History, 17(2), 202- 216. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17511341111112604Hindle, T. (2008, October 3). Douglas McGregor. Retrieved from The Economist: http://economist.com/node/12366698

References, cont.Kelly, E. P. (2000). Douglas McGregor, revisited: Managing the human side of the enterprise. The Academy of Management Executive, 14(3), 143-145. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.sckans.edu/login?url=http://search.proqu est.com/docview/210529248?accountid=13979 Kopelman, R. (n.d). Douglas McGregor's Theory X and Y: Toward a Construct-valid Measure*. vol. 20, no. 2 (Summer 2008), p. 255-273Kopelman, R.E., Prottas, D.J., & Falk, D.W. (2012). Further development of a measure of theory x and y managerial assumptions. 24(4), 450-471Meeker, S.M.E. (1982). THEORY Y: ANOTHER LOOK. Southern Review of Public Administration (Pre-1986), 5(4), 500. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.sckans.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/211528115?accountid=13979Merriam-Webster, (2014). Theory. Retrieved from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/theory

References, cont.Norris, W.R., & Vecchio, R.P. (1992). Situational leadership theory A replication. Group & Organization Studies (1986-1998), 17(3), 331. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.sckands.edu/login?url=http://proquest.com/do cview/232776094?accountid=13979 Situational Leadership. (n.d) Retrieved from: http://mc.edu/rotc/files/9213/1471/9571/MSL_202_L09b_Situational_Leadership.pdfStewart, M. (2010) McGregor’s Theory x and y revisited. 3(1) Oxford Leadership Journal. Retrieved from: http://www.oxfordleadership.com/journal/vol1_issue3/s tewart.pdfSund, A. (2012). The antecedents and outcomes of McGregor’s theory endorsement. Retrieved from https://learn.sckans.edu/courses/1/MGMT500PA2014SUMMER02PS2a/groups/_9492_1//_628433_1/The%20Ant ecedents%20and%20Outcomes%20of%20McGregor%27s%20Theory%2