The Human Side of Enterprise Free Essay Example

In hard-boiled competitive environment, gradual shift towards knowledge based work force capturing hidden and diverse potentials is a challenge really to beckon for many leaders of existing and newly emerging network organizations of various endeavoring dispositions. In gradual change in working patterns, leadership traits must reflect their tendency to adopt what Douglas S. Fletcher said, “Commitment and an emotional connection with people”. (Fletcher, Online Edition)

To mix the ‘Emotional Connection’ with other characteristic traits that mark the leadership qualities is a very arduous task.

Other Leadership qualities entail him to create an environment of coordinated approach towards requirements of an organization and the employee’s aspirations arising out of their work experiences. In between these two is an ability to communicate. Good communication skills enable managers to create an environment for employees to pour out their hidden potentials with freedom and with certain controls.

Douglas McGregor (1960) in his The Human Side of Enterprise puts our attention towards basic traits of human nature, and how by embracing these traits managers adopt the relationship and attitude towards employees.

Managers’ style and approach toward their subordinates is based on their own assumptions about them. According to McGregor, most of the time managers or supervisors think that their employees are lazy, un-ambitious and lacking in self confidence and to get them to work they should adopt some stringent measures like threatening, bribery, punishment etc. In other words, they adopt the carrot or stick approach to motivate them. The carrot approach implies coaxing of employees and stick approach implies threatening with punishments.

This is a hard approach adopted by various managers and employees, which Douglas McGregor named as Theory X. Another is a much softer approach promising employee’s rewards for meeting their targets. This aspect is known a Theory Y.  These approaches are not formally approached but many of the organizations have number of policies and laid down procedures on the basis of these two assumptions. In organizational set up, upper management team makes decisions regarding jobs and goals for the employees and rewards on various criteria, and those who do not meet requirements of organizations are punished. Many of these aspects are taken from the scientific management theories of Frederick Taylor, laying emphasis on the amount of productive capacity of workers.

McGregor was a futurist, as he had conceptualized human angle in the leadership skills much before people could actually adopt it in practice. Earlier practice was autocratic, adopted according to the predictions about the results from fixed inputs and transferable staff. McGregor wrote, “To a considerable degree, man has been perceived to be like a physical body at rest. It requires the application of external forces to set him in motion–to motivate him to work. Consequently, extrinsic rewards and punishments are obvious and appropriate “forces” to be utilized in controlling organized human effort”. (Heil, Stephens & Bennis, 2000).

McGregor theory has far reaching consequences. It not only introduced new system of organization but also gave ample space to the employees to churn out their potentials, gain personal satisfaction, increase knowledge and attain self-confidence through many rewards. Theory X and Theory Y also increased opportunity for human resource department to boost team-building spirit, management development, and to attain self-knowledge for people holding supervisory positions.

To fruitfully put theories into practice has become most difficult task in any organization set up. In the competitive world of today, an internal structure of organization has become more complex, temporary and unpredictable than before and here lies management skills making it more versatile and flexible meeting the needs and aspirations of the organization and to make it stand apart in the real world.

Need of the hour is to follow what is said “Go together” approach and the development of trust.  Go together approach implies to move towards the path of achieving goals in a team. Teamwork inculcates the spirit of trust and bonding between management and employees and among employees themselves. Francis Fukymaya too says, “Trust functions as a form of social glue binding people and organizations together.” (Heil, Stephens & Bennis, 2000) Trust is the most important aspect in the digitized world and as now more and more employees are working in far off areas, their communication towards fruitful and combined goals is only because of the trust. But this trust appears to have a less relevance in Theory X as Theory X assumptions as said by Harold Koontz and Cyril O’Donnell, “might lead to the superior setting of objectives with little or no participation from subordinates.” (Barnett, Online Edition: Theory X and Theory Y)

In other words in Theory X assumption, management team set their objectives and goals of the company whereby subordinates have low or very minimum role and in this environment, there can be a lack of trust and subordinates may resist against the assumed autocratic propositions of team management. Theory X could likely result in autocratic role of the management and act as a performance judge. (Barnett, Online Edition: Theory X and Theory Y) On the other hand, theory Y depends on the subordinates self motivation and self -control. They are equally participating in the management activities.

If companies or organizations go completely by theory Y then it may thwart the very basic concept on which management stands as defined by Henry Fayol in his Classic 1916 book Administration Industrielle et Generale. Theory Y’s main focus is on participating management, in other words, managers participate actively with their subordinates to make decisions but according to Henry Fayol’s definition, “Management is: planning, organizing, commanding, coordinating, and controlling.”(Barnett, Online Edition: Management functions).

It implies it is only the duty of management to make plans, organize work schedules, give commands to the subordinates and supervise them. Hereby, it is not necessary for the management to make their subordinates take part in decision-making. This system is more practically applicable in any organization set up as it creates an environment of discipline and target oriented approach.

Douglas McGregor, Human Side of Enterprise is a revolutionary in itself but his theory X and Y do not define many other factors determining employees conditioning of working. These factors are job security, consensual decision-making, slow evaluation and promotion procedures, and responsibility of individuals within a group. In this world of technology, the most important task in front of management is to create an environment that may result in collaborative atmosphere in every department of organization. As Joseph Scanlon said, to really make it in use in practical life is to first make it a way of life, and even social sciences of today are pointing to this fact.

REFERENCE LIST

Barnett T. Management Functions. Retrieved on January 31, 2008 from W.W.W: http://www.referenceforbusiness.com/management/Log-Mar/Management-Functions.html

Barnett T. (Revised by Scott B. Droege) Theory X And Theory Y. Retrieved on January 31, 2008 from W.W.W:

Fletcher D. Art of Leadership – Human Side of Enterprise (Part Two): Leaders At All Levels. Retrieved on January 30, 2008 from W.W.W: http://www.leader-values.com/content/detail.asp?ContentDetailID=22

Heil G., Stephens D. and Bennis W. 2000. Douglas McGregor, Revisited: Managing the Human Side of the Enterprise. Publisher: John Wiley & Sons. http://www.leadershipnow.com/leadershop/1462-5excerpt.html