The way in which managers approach the performance of their jobs and the behaviour

they display towards subordinate staff is likely to be conditioned by predispositions

about people, and human nature and work.
Drawing on Maslows hierarchy of needs model (which is discussed in Chapter 12),
McGregor put forward two suppositions about human nature and behaviour at work. He
argues that the style of management adopted is a function of the managers attitudes
towards people and assumptions about human nature and behaviour. The two supposi-
tions are called Theory X and Theory Y, and are based on polar assumptions about
people and work.
4
Theory X represents the carrot-and-stick assumptions on which traditional organisations
are based, and was widely accepted and practised before the development of the
human relations approach. Its assumptions are that:
the average person is lazy and has an inherent dislike of work;
most people must be coerced, controlled, directed and threatened with punishment
if the organisation is to achieve its objectives;
the average person avoids responsibility, prefers to be directed, lacks ambition and
values security most of all; and
motivation occurs only at the physiological and security levels.
The central principle of Theory X is direction and control through a centralised
system of organisation and the exercise of authority. McGregor questions whether
the Theory X approach to human nature is correct, and the relevance today of man-
agement practices which are based upon it. Assumptions based on a Theory X
approach, and the traditional use of rewards and sanctions exercised by the nature of
the managers position and authority, are likely to result in an exploitative or authori-
tarian style of management.
At the other extreme to Theory X is Theory Y which represents the assumptions consis-
tent with current research knowledge. The central principle of Theory Y is the
integration of individual and organisational goals. Its assumptions are:
for most people work is as natural as play or rest;
people will exercise self-direction and self-control in the service of objectives to
which they are committed;
commitment to objectives is a function of rewards associated with their achievement;
given the right conditions, the average worker can learn to accept and to seek
responsibility;
the capacity for creativity in solving organisational problems is distributed widely in
the population;
the intellectual potential of the average person is only partially utilised; and
motivation occurs at the affiliation, esteem and self-actualisation levels as well as the
physiological and security levels.
McGregor implies that a Theory Y approach is the best way to elicit co-operation from
members of an organisation. It is the task of management to create the conditions in
which individuals may satisfy their motivational needs, and in which they achieve
their own goals through meeting the goals of the organisation. McGregor develops an
analysis of the implications of accepting Theory Y in regard to performance appraisal,
administration of salaries and promotions, participation, staffline relationships, lead-
ership, management development and the managerial team.
238 PART 3 THE ROLE OF THE MANAGER
MANAGERS ATTITUDES TOWARDS PEOPLE
Theory X
assumptions
about human
nature
Theory Y
assumptions
about human
nature
Managerial strategies
Although Theory X and Theory Y are based on polar extremes and are an over-
simplification, they do represent identifiable philosophies which influence managerial
behaviour and strategies. For example, as Lord Sieff comments:
Now and again it is necessary to criticize people, but rather than tick them off, provided you can
leave them in no doubt as to what the issue is, I am sure it pays to avoid being censorious but try
instead to appeal to the innate capacity for self-criticism. Whatever you do, avoid making a
mountain out of a molehill.
5
Most people have the potential to be self-motivating. They can best achieve their per-
sonal goals through self-direction of their efforts towards meeting the goals of the
organisation. Broadening educational standards and changing social values mean that
people today have wider expectations of the quality of working life, including opportu-
nities for consultation and participation in decisions which affect them. Managers
should develop practices based more on an accurate understanding of human behav-
iour and motivation.
The Theory Y approach, however, is not a soft option. In practice it is often diffi-
cult to achieve successfully. It can be frustrating and time-consuming, and mistakes
will occur.
The two views of Theory X and Theory Y tend to represent extremes of the natural
inclination of managers towards a particular style of behaviour. In practice, however,
the actual style of management behaviour adopted will be influenced by the demands
of the situation.
7
Where the job offers a high degree of intrinsic satisfaction or involves
a variety of tasks, an element of problem-solving and the exercise of initiative, or
where output is difficult to measure in quantitative terms, an informal, participative
approach would seem to be more effective. It is more likely to lead to a higher level of
staff morale. In many cases this would apply to work of a scientific, technical or profes-
sional nature. Where commitment to the goals of the organisation is almost a
prerequisite of membership, such as in certain voluntary or charity organisations, for
example, then a Theory Y approach would clearly seem to be most appropriate.
However, even if a manager has a basic belief in Theory Y assumptions there may be
occasions when it is necessary, or more appropriate, to adopt a Theory X approach.
When the nature of the job itself offers little intrinsic reward or limited opportunities
to satisfy higher-level needs, a more dictatorial style of management might work best.
Some jobs are designed narrowly, with highly predictable tasks, and output measured
precisely. This is the case, for example, with many complex production processes in
manufacturing firms. With these types of jobs a Theory X approach may be needed if
an adequate level of performance is to be maintained.
CHAPTER 7 MANAGERIAL BEHAVIOUR AND EFFECTIVENESS 239
Since 1952 Ive been stumbling around buildings and running primitive Theory Y depart-
ments, divisions, and finally one whole Theory Y company: Avis.
In 1962, after thirteen years, Avis had never made a profit (except one year when
they jiggled their depreciation rates). Three years later the company had grown internation-
ally (not by acquisitions) from $30 million in sales to $75 million in sales, and had made
successive annual profits of $1 million, $3 million, and $5 million. If I had anything to do
with this, I ascribe it all to my application of Theory Y. And a faltering, stumbling, groping,
mistake-ridden application it was.
Robert Townsend
6
Demands of
the situation
Use of a Theory
X approach
One means of describing and evaluating different styles of management is the Blake and
Mouton Managerial Grid (see Figure 7.1). First published as the Managerial Grid in 1964,
restated in 1978 and 1985
13
and republished in 1991 as the Leadership Grid,
14
the Grid pro-
vides a basis for comparison of managerial styles in terms of two principal dimensions:
concern for production; and
concern for people.
Concern for production is the amount of emphasis which the manager places on
accomplishing the tasks in hand, achieving a high level of production and getting
results or profits. This is represented along the horizontal axis of the Grid.
Concern for people is the amount of emphasis which the manager gives to subordi-
nates and colleagues as individuals and to their needs and expectations. This is
represented along the vertical axis of the Grid.
Five basic combinations
Concern for is not how much concern, but indicates the character and strength of
assumptions which underlie the managers own basic attitudes and style of manage-
ment. The significant point is how the manager expresses concern about production
or about people. The four corners and the centre of the Grid provide five basic combi-
nations of degree of concern for production coupled with degree of concern for people
(see Figure 7.1(a)).
the impoverished manager (1,1 rating), low concern for production and low con-
cern for people;
the authoritycompliance manager (9,1 rating), high concern for production and
low concern for people;
the country club manager (1,9 rating), low concern for production and high con-
cern for people;
the middle-of-the-road manager (5,5 rating), moderate concern for production and
moderate concern for people; and
the team manager (9,9 rating), high concern for production and high concern
for people.
Managers with a 1,1 rating tend to be remote from their subordinates and believe in
the minimum movement from their present position. They do as little as they can with
production or with people. Too much attention to production will cause difficulties with
staff and too much attention to the needs of staff will cause problems with production.
CHAPTER 7 MANAGERIAL BEHAVIOUR AND EFFECTIVENESS 241
The cynic might describe efforts to turn Theory Y into practice as doing with difficulty what
comes naturally to the Japanese. There, excellent managers apply principles of behaviour
which translate perfectly into western language and which have long been echoed in the
progressive areas of the west. Yet you still encounter the old ostrich attitudes that caused
western companies so much damage in the past: for instance, the argument that to emulate
Japan is impossible because of its peculiar culture. But the famous national enthusiasm for
good business and effective management isnt simply a product of Japans culture. After all,
sloppy western habits, like investing too little in productive capacity, new products, train-
ing, quality and marketing are hardly cultural not unless bad business economics are
built into the western mentality.
Robert Heller
12
THE MANAGERIAL/LEADERSHIP GRID

242 PART 3 THE ROLE OF THE MANAGER

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
High
Low
Low High
Concern for results
C
o
n
c
e
r
n

f
o
r

p
e
o
p
l
e
1,9 9,9
9,1 1,1
Country club management
Thoughtful attention to the
needs of people for satisfying
relationships leads to a
comfortable, friendly organisation
atmosphere and
work tempo.
Team management
Work accomplishment is
from committed people;
interdependence through a
common stake in organisation
purpose leads to relationships
of trust and respect.
Impoverished management
Exertion of minimum effort
to get required work done
is appropriate to sustain
organisation membership.
Authoritycompliance
management
Efficiency in operations results
from arranging conditions of
work in such a way that
human elements interfere
to a minimum degree.
9+9
9+9: Paternalism/maternalism
Reward and approval are bestowed
to people in return for loyalty and
obedience; failure to comply leads
to punishment
In Opportunistic management, people adapt
and shift to any Grid style needed to gain the maximum
advantage. Performance occurs according to a
system of selfish gain. Effort is given only for an
advantage or personal gain.
Opportunism
5,5
1,1
1,9 9,9
9,1
,9
9,
5,5
Middle-of-the-road management
Adequate organisation performance is
possible through balancing the necessity
to get work out while maintaining morale
of people at a satisfactory level.
(a)
(b) (c)
9+9
,9
9,
Figure 7.1 The Leadership Grid
(Source: Blake, R. R. and McCanse, A. A. (1991) Leadership Dilemmas Grid Solutions, Gulf Publishing Co., Houston (1991),
Grid Figure, p. 29, Paternalism Figure, p. 30, Opportunism Figure, p. 31. Reproduced by permission of Grid International, Inc.)
CHAPTER 7 MANAGERIAL BEHAVIOUR AND EFFECTIVENESS 243
Managers with a 9,1 rating are autocratic. They tend to rely on a centralised system
and the use of authority. Staff are regarded as a means of production and motivation is
based on competition between people in order to get work done. If staff challenge an
instruction or standard procedure they are likely to be viewed as unco-operative.
The 1,9 rating managers believe that a contented staff will undertake what is
required of them and achieve a reasonable level of output. Production is secondary
to the avoidance of conflict and maintenance of harmony among the staff. Managers
will seek to find compromises between staff and solutions acceptable to everyone.
Although innovation may be encouraged, they tend to reject good ideas if likely to
cause difficulties among the staff.
The 5,5 rating is the middle-of-the-road management with the approach of live
and let live and a tendency to avoid the real issues. This style of management is the
dampened pendulum with managers swinging between concern for production and
concern for people. Under pressure, this style of management tends to become task
management (9,1). Where this strains relations and causes resentment from staff, how-
ever, pressure is eased and managers adopt a compromise approach. If there is a swing
too much the other way (towards 1,9) managers are likely to take a tighter and more
hardened approach.
Managers with a 9,9 rating believe in the integrating of the task needs and con-
cern for people. They believe in creating a situation whereby people can satisfy their
own needs by commitment to the objectives of the organisation. Managers will discuss
problems with the staff, seek their ideas and give them freedom of action. Difficulties
in working relationships will be handled by confronting staff directly and attempting
to work out solutions with them.
These five styles of management represent the extremes of the Grid. With a nine-point
scale on each axis there is a total of 81 different mixtures of concern for production
and concern for people. Most people would come up with a score somewhere in an
intermediary position on the Grid.
1991 edition of the Grid also covers two additional styles: opportunism and 9+9 pater-
nalism/maternalism, which take account of the reaction of subordinates.
In opportunistic management, organisational performance occurs according to a
system of exchanges, whereby effort is given only for an equivalent measure of the
same. People adapt to the situation to gain maximum advantage of it. (See Figure
7.1(b).)
In 9+9 paternalistic/maternalistic management, reward and approval are granted
to people in return for loyalty and obedience; and punishment is threatened for fail-
ure to comply (see Figure 7.1(c)).
A summary of the seven basic combinations of the Grid is given in Table 7.1.
The Managerial Grid provides a framework in which managers can identify, study and
review their patterns of behaviour. Instead of viewing management styles as a
dichotomy of either/or, Blake and Mouton claim that the Managerial Grid illustrates
that the manager can gain the benefits of maximising, simultaneously, methods which
are both production-oriented and people-oriented. The 9,9 position, although an ideal,
is worth working for.
Based on their experience of using the original Grid, Blake and Mouton give three
reasons why it is important to consider which style of management is used to achieve
production through people.
Two additional
grid styles
FRAMEWORK FOR PATTERNS OF BEHAVIOUR
In order to get people to accept solutions, the manager needs continually to
co-ordinate and balance in order to compromise conflicting values. The leader cre-
ates excitement in work and develops choices that give substance to images that
excite people.
In their relationships with other people, managers maintain a low level of emotional
involvement. Leaders have empathy with other people and give attention to what
events and actions mean.
Managers see themselves more as conservators and regulators of the existing order of
affairs with which they identify, and from which they gain rewards. Leaders work in,
but do not belong to, the organisation. Their sense of identity does not depend
upon membership or work roles and they search out opportunities for change.
22
The differences between leadership and management have been applied by Watson to
the 7-S organisational framework of: strategy, structure, systems, style, staff, skills and
superordinate (or shared) goals. Watson suggests that whereas managers tend towards
reliance on
strategy,
structure, and
systems,
leaders have an inherent inclination for utilisation of the soft Ss of
style,
staff,
skills, and
shared goals.
Watson also suggests, although cautiously, that 7-S management could be seen as
the province of leaders. Managers will not ordinarily be capable of achieving sufficient
mastery of all seven factors to attain a consistently high level of organisational
performance.
23
Distinction between management and leadership
Based on experience of management approaches in both commerce and the military,
Hollingsworth questions how many managers consider themselves first and foremost as
leaders, relegating manager to their job title. He argues that commercial managers
need to learn from the armed forces if they wish to be viewed as leaders. Having
accepted that there are some links between management and leadership,
Hollingsworth lists six fundamental differences.
A manager administers a leader innovates.
A manager maintains a leader develops.
A manager focuses on systems and structure a leader focuses on people.
A manager relies on control a leader inspires trust.
A manager keeps an eye on the bottom line a leader has an eye on the horizon.
A manager does things right a leader does the right thing.
24
Not everyone would agree with this list. Robinson, for example, suggests that if the
word manager is replaced by administrator then the lists works. However, whatever
your view the list makes for a helpful basis for critical discussion on the nature of man-
agement and leadership.
25
In Chapter 6 we discussed management as getting work done through the efforts of
other people. To be an effective manager it is necessary to exercise the role of leader-
ship. A common view is that the job of the manager requires the ability of leadership
284 PART 3 THE ROLE OF THE MANAGER
The 7-S
organisational
framework
The first approach assumes that leaders are born and not made. Leadership consists of
certain inherited characteristics, or personality traits, which distinguish leaders from
their followers: the so-called Great Person theory of leadership. The qualities approach
focuses attention on the man or woman in the job and not on the job itself. It suggests
that attention is given to the selection of leaders rather than to training for leadership.
For example, Drucker (writing originally in 1955) makes the point that:
Leadership is of utmost importance. Indeed there is no substitute for it. But leadership cannot be
created or promoted. It cannot be taught or learned.
31
There have been many research studies into the common traits of leadership. However,
attempts at identifying common personality, or physical and mental, characteristics of
different good or successful leaders have met with little success.
32
Investigations
have identified lists of traits which tend to be overlapping, contradictory or with little
correlation for most features.
It is noticeable that individuality or originality usually features in the list of traits.
This itself suggests that there is little in common between specific personality traits of
different leaders. It is perhaps possible therefore to identify general characteristics of
leadership ability, such as self-confidence, initiative, intelligence and belief in ones
actions, but research into this area has revealed little more than this. In a series of
interviews with headhunters, and senior figures in industry and the city, Management
Today came up with a list of Britains most powerful women in business. A conclusion
from the list is that the top 50 women do not fit any pattern. They wield the kind of
power and influence that defies stereotypes.
33
There are two further limitations with this approach.
First, there is bound to be some subjective judgement in determining who is
regarded as a good or successful leader.
Second, the lists of possible traits tend to be very long and there is not always agree-
ment on the most important.
Even if it were possible to identify an agreed list of more specific qualities, this would
provide little explanation of the nature of leadership. It would do little to help in the
development and training of future leaders. Although there is still some interest in
the qualities, or traits, approach, attention has been directed more to other approaches
to leadership.
The qualities or traits approach gives rise to the questions: whether leaders are
born or made; and whether leadership is an art or a science. The important point,
however, is that these are not mutually exclusive alternatives. Even if there are cer-
tain inborn qualities which make for a good leader, these natural talents need
encouragement and development. Even if leadership is something of an art, it still
requires the application of special skills and techniques.
This approach to leadership focuses attention not on the personality of the leader, nor
on the man or woman in the job, per se, but on the functions of leadership.
Leadership is always present in any group engaged in a task. The functional approach
views leadership in terms of how the leaders behaviour affects, and is affected by,
the group of followers. This approach concentrates on the nature of the group, the fol-
lowers or subordinates. It focuses on the content of leadership.
CHAPTER 8 THE NATURE OF LEADERSHIP
THE QUALITIES OR TRAITS APPROACH
287
Limitations of
the traits
approach
THE FUNCTIONAL (OR GROUP) APPROACH
Once a lower need has been satisfied, it no longer acts as a strong motivator. The needs
of the next higher level in the hierarchy demand satisfaction and become the motivat-
ing influence. Only unsatisfied needs motivate a person. Thus Maslow asserts that a
satisfied need is no longer a motivator.
Although Maslow suggests that most people have these basic needs in about the order
indicated, he also makes it clear that the hierarchy is not necessarily a fixed order.
There will be a number of exceptions to the order indicated. For some people there will
be a reversal of the hierarchy, for example:
Self-esteem may seem to be more important than love to some people. This is the
most common reversal of the hierarchy. It is often based on the belief that the
person most loved is strong, confident or inspires respect. People seeking love try to
put on a show of aggressive, confident behaviour. They are not really seeking self-
esteem as an end in itself but for the sake of love needs.
For some innately creative people the drive for creativity and self-actualisation may
arise despite lack of satisfaction of more basic needs.
Higher-level needs may be lost in some people who will continue to be satisfied
at lower levels only: for example, a person who has experienced chronic unemployment.
Some people who have been deprived of love in early childhood may experience the
permanent loss of love needs.
A need which has continued to be satisfied over a long period of time may be under-
valued. For example, people who have never suffered from chronic hunger may tend
to underestimate its effects, and regard food as rather an unimportant thing. Where
people are dominated by a higher-level need this may assume greater importance
than more basic needs.
People with high ideals or values may become martyrs and give up everything else
for the sake of their beliefs.
Maslow claims that the hierarchy is relatively universal among different cultures, but
he recognises that there are differences in an individuals motivational content in a
particular culture.
CHAPTER 12 WORK MOTIVATION AND REWARDS 481
Figure 12.5 Maslows hierarchy of needs model
Not necessarily
a fixed order
Maslow points out that a false impression may be given that a need must be satisfied fully
before a subsequent need arises. He suggests that a more realistic description is in terms
of decreasing percentages of satisfaction along levels of the hierarchy. For example,
arbitrary figures for the average person may be: satisfied 85 per cent in physiological needs;
70 per cent in safety needs; 50 per cent in love needs; 40 per cent in esteem needs; and 10
per cent in self-actualisation needs. There is a gradual emergence of a higher-level need as
lower-level needs become more satisfied. The relative importance of these needs changes
during the psychological development of the individual. Maslow subsequently modified
his views by noting that satisfaction of self-actualisation needs by growth-motivated indi-
viduals can actually enhance these needs rather than reduce them. Furthermore, he
accepted that some higher-level needs may still emerge after long deprivation of lower-
level needs, rather than only after their satisfaction.
Evaluation of Maslows theory
Based on Maslows theory, once lower-level needs have been satisfied (say at the physiolog-
ical and safety levels) giving more of the same does not provide motivation. Individuals
advance up the hierarchy as each lower-level need becomes satisfied. Therefore, to provide
motivation for a change in behaviour, the manager must direct attention to the next
higher level of needs (in this case, love or social needs) that seek satisfaction.
However, there are a number of problems in relating Maslows theory to the work situ-
ation. These include the following:
People do not necessarily satisfy their needs, especially higher-level needs, just
through the work situation. They satisfy them through other areas of their life as
well. Therefore the manager would need to have a complete understanding of
peoples private and social life, not just their behaviour at work.
There is doubt about the time which elapses between the satisfaction of a lower-level
need and the emergence of a higher-level need.
Individual differences mean that people place different values on the same need. For
example, some people prefer what they might see as the comparative safety of work-
ing in a bureaucratic organisation to a more highly paid and higher status position,
but with less job security, in a different organisation.
Some rewards or outcomes at work satisfy more than one need. Higher salary or pro-
motion, for example, can be applied to all levels of the hierarchy.
Even for people within the same level of the hierarchy, the motivating factors will
not be the same. There are many different ways in which people may seek satisfac-
tion of, for example, their esteem needs.
Maslow viewed satisfaction as the main motivational outcome of behaviour. But job
satisfaction does not necessarily lead to improved work performance.
Although Maslow did not originally intend that the need hierarchy should necessarily
be applied to the work situation, it still remains popular as a theory of motivation at
work. Despite criticisms and doubts about its limitations, the theory has had a signifi-
cant impact on management approaches to motivation and the design of organisations
to meet individual needs. It is a convenient framework for viewing the different needs
and expectations that people have, where they are in the hierarchy, and the different
motivators that might be applied to people at different levels.
The work of Maslow has drawn attention to a number of different motivators and
stimulated study and research. The need hierarchy model provides a useful base for the
evaluation of motivation at work. For example, Steers and Porter suggest a list of general
rewards and organisational factors used to satisfy different needs (see Table 12.1).
29
482 PART 4 THE INDIVIDUAL
Degrees of
satisfaction
Applications to
the work
situation
A useful basis
for evaluation
Saunders contends that despite the time that has elapsed, Maslows theory remains
watertight.
When prehistoric man first took shelter in a cave and lit a fire, he was satisfying his lowest
physiological and safety needs. When a Buddhist achieves a state of nirvana, she is satisfying
the fifth and highest self-actualisation The cave these days might be a three-bedroom semi
with garden and off-street parking, but the fact remains that once weve got enough to feed,
clothe and house our families money is a low-level motivator for most people. The dash for cash
is soon replaced by the desire for recognition, status and ultimately (although Maslow reckoned
that a lot of us never get this far) the need to express yourself through your work.
30
Revisiting and developing Maslows hierarchy, Stum looked at the dynamic between an
individual and the organisation, and proposes a new employee/employer social con-
tract that enables organisations to improve employee commitment and retention. The
five levels of workforce needs hierarchy are shown in a Performance Pyramid.
Safety/security the need to feel physically and psychologically safe in the work
environment for commitment to be possible;
Rewards the need for extrinsic rewards in compensation and benefits;
Affiliation the intrinsic need for a sense of belonging to the work team or
organisation;
Growth addressing the need for positive individual and organisational change to
drive commitment;
Work/life harmony the drive to achieve a sense of fulfilment in balancing work
and life responsibilities.
31
CHAPTER 12 WORK MOTIVATION AND REWARDS 483
Needs levels General rewards Organisational factors
1 Physiological Food, water, sex, sleep a Pay
b Pleasant working conditions
c Cafeteria
2 Safety Safety, security, a Safe working conditions
stability, protection b Company benefits
c Job security
3 Social Love, affection, a Cohesive work group
belongingness b Friendly supervision
c Professional associations
4 Esteem Self-esteem, self-respect, a Social recognition
prestige, status b Job title
c High status job
d Feedback from the job itself
5 Self-actualisation Growth, advancement, a Challenging job
creativity b Opportunities for creativity
c Achievement in work
d Advancement in the organisation
Table 12.1 Applying Maslows need hierarchy
(Source: Steers, R. M. and Porter, L. W, Motivation and Work Behaviour, Fifth edition, McGraw-Hill (1991) p. 35. Reproduced with permission
from The McGraw-Hill Companies Inc.)
Pyramid of
employee
commitment