Turn Staff into Team!!!
“The voyage of discovery is not in seeking new landscapes but in having new eyes”…..
Continuing from the previous lecture of Dr. Mandi focussed on the kind of perception managers hold on their employees, the way they generally behave, which depend on their” attitude” not on their “attributes”. In this class he taught us about how the authoritative management is different from participative style of management, with the help of “Theory X and Theory Y “.
Theory X and Theory Y are theories of human motivation created and developed by Douglas McGregor in the 1960s that have been used in human resource management, organizational behavior, organizational communication and organizational development.
The lecture was based on the implications that each theory have on the output and mind set of the employee. He describes the class contrasting models of workforce motivation.
The theory goes this way:
According theory of X and Y that there are two types of managers:
In X theory describes Authoritative Management and Y theory describes Participative Management.
|
The effect of the above management on the staff can be deduced by the following figure:
From the above theory the following four interesting cases can be deduced:
1) Theory X Manager assume LAZY workers as LAZY and make them work
2) Theory X Manager assume NOT LAZY workers as NOT LAZY and make them work
3) Theory Y Manager assume LAZY workers as LAZY and make them work
4) Theory Y Manager assume NOT LAZY workers as NOT LAZY and make them work
2) Theory X Manager assume NOT LAZY workers as NOT LAZY and make them work
3) Theory Y Manager assume LAZY workers as LAZY and make them work
4) Theory Y Manager assume NOT LAZY workers as NOT LAZY and make them work
Employee type
Manager type
|
Good
|
Lazy
|
X
|
Thinks employee is lazy
|
Thinks employee is Lazy
|
Y
|
Thinks employee is good
|
Thinks employee is good
|
Understanding the cases one by one:
1) Case 1: Theory X Manager assume LAZY workers as LAZY and make them work :
IMPLICATIONS:
Management assumes employees are intrinsically lazy and will avoid work. They always find fault in whatever their team’s work as they believe that the team members are lazy and not putting in their sincere efforts. This is the situation where both worker and manager dislike their respective work. This would not to decrease in efficiency of the employer and also a negative impact on the output of the organization.
EXAMPLE:
In my graduation college, I have seen people being indolent to work. Infact, I could find people both at lower and upper level of management equally reluctant to work. The the manager himself was lazy because of this gave the people under him an easy way not to do work.
2)Case 2: Theory X Manager assume NOT LAZY workers as NOT LAZY and make them work
IMPLICATIONS:
This is a situation is dangerous where where hard working workers are treated as lazy workers, who are performing well are not given any motivation to continue doing so. The work culture in this situation deteriorates, which leads to large exodus and decrease in productivity of the organization..
EXAMPLE:
This is a typical senior-junior situation where the manager has no belief on the employee. It happened with one of my friend during college. A junior was late to attend an urgent team meeting. This created prejudice in my friend’s mind that he is not sincere in his work, but later my friend got to know from his peers that he’s actually one the best we have on our team.
3.) Case 3:Theory Y Manager assume LAZY workers as LAZY and make them work :
IMPLICATIONS:
This is the situations where the employees are lethargic but the management thinks they are hard working. There is not much control exercised over employees which results in decrease in productivity. In this case the managers should motivate the employee to better their performance by giving them various incentives. This would not only motive him to do efficient but also effective work.
EXAMPLE:
As a starter, I was not very good at playing volleyball. In my initial matches due to my poor performance, we lost some good strokes in the game .But my team captain not only motivated me but also suggested me ways of improving my game. And in the next game I did, she congratulated me as I played well. This was possible because she displayed Manager Y characteristics which motivated me to do better next time and stand upto team expectations.
4.) Case 4:Theory Y Manager assume NOT LAZY workers as NOT LAZY and make them work
IMPLICATIONS:
This particular situation is the best for any company to be in. Its employees are not lazy and they are also getting due reward of their hard work and diligence. The mangers feel that their employees are doing good work which lead leads to an overall great working culture in the organization.
EXAMPLE:
It refers to a fair situation when your manager appraises you based on your performance.
MY LEARNING’S:
Thus, the class has provided me a great insight that how as a manger my perception and attitude towards my employees can help me to make my work place more effectual, efficient and effective. Most of us are convinced that a good manger with a encouraging attitude will continuously grow and lead .
With positive note I end here:
