JOVRNM. OF MANAGERIAL ISSUES Vol.

XX Number 2 Summn 2008: 255-271

Douglas McGregor's Theory X and Y: Toward a Construct-valid Measure*

Richard E. Kopelman
Professor of Management

Baruch College

David J. Prottas
Assistant Professor of Management

Adelphi University

Anne L. Davis
Colonel

Tooele Army Depot Douglas McGregor's landmark

book. The Human Side of Enterprise

(1960), changed the path of management thinking and practice. Questioning some of tbe fundamental assumptions about buman bebavior in oignnizations, he outlined a new role lor managers: rather than commanding and controlling subordinates, managers should assist them in reaching iheir full potendal. At the foundation of McGregor's Theory Y are ihe assumptions that employees are; (1) not inherently lazy, (2) capable of self-direction and self-control, and (3) capable of providing important

ideas/suggestions that will improve organizational effectiveness. Tbus, with appropriate management practices, such as providing objectives and rewards and tlie opportunity to participate in decision making, personal and organizational goals can simultaneously be realized. In contrast to Theory Y, McGregor posited that conventional managerial assumptions (wbicb be called Tbcoiy X) reflect essentially an opposite and negative view^viz., tbat employees are lazy, are incapable of self-<iiieciion and aulonomous work bebavior, and have little to offer hi terms of organiza-

'Wf graiciiilly acknowledge lhe helpful comments of our colleagues, Abe Konnan, AJlen Kraut, Hannah Rothsiein, and Donald Vredenbiirgh as well as an anonymous reviewer. Earlier versions of this article were pit'sciued at rhe \\2\\\ Meeting of the American Psychological Assotialion (2004) iind lhe 22n(i .Annual (Conference (if lhe Society lor Industrial and Organizational Psychology (2007). JOURNAL OE MANAGERIAL ISSUES Vol. XX Number 2 Summer 2008 (255)

256

THEORY X AND THEORY Y

tional problem solving. Hereafter, we refer to McGregor's theorizing as Theory X/Y. Indicative of McGregor's impact. Miner's (2003) review of 73 established organizational behavior theories found that Theory X/Y was tied for second in terms of recognition and in 33rd place witb respect to importance. By the time The Human Sid^ of Enterjnise yidiS repubUshed in 1985, it bad become a classic with the book jacket reading like a Who's Who in Management. Dnicker bailed it as "ever more relevant, more timely, and more important." Townsend called it "the most poweiful and useful book about people I've ever read." Kanter claimed it contained "profound and timeless trutbs." Waterman declared it "a classic text that is a fundamental touchstone for anyone in management and organizational development." Bennis wrote ". . . tbis book, more tban any olher book on management, changed an entire concept of organizational man and replaced it with a new paradigm that stressed himian potentials, emphasized human growth, and elevated the buman role in industrial society" (McGregor, 1985: iv). However, as Miner noted in his comprehensive (2002) text on organizational behavior theories and research, "[t]here are very few direct tests of McGregor's fonnulation in tbe literature. . . . Furthermore, McGregor himself conducted no research related to his formulations, nor did he attempt to make bis variables operational in any kind of measurement procedures" (2002: 261). In our view, McGregor's theorizing about the effects of individual differences in managerial assumptions bas remained virtually unexamined due lo the absence of prior construct val-

idation research. Clearly, it is not possible to test McGregor's theory if the central constaictthe assumptive world (or cosmology) of the focal managerlacks a published, construct-valid measure. In ligbt of tbis long overdue undertaking, tbe present research reports on the developtncnt and construct validation of a measure of Theory X and Theory Y assumptions/attitudes. McGregor identified a number of management practices tbat be tbougbt were consonant witb Theory Y assumptions (sucb as participative leadership, delegation. Job enlargement and peiformance appraisals). Consequentlyand unfortunately in our viewtests of the efficacy of these management practices were often interpreted as a proxy for assessing the validity of McGregor's theorizing. Successful implementation of participative leadersbip, for example, is at best only tangentially related to McGregor's theorizing. Moreover, McGregor recognized that implementation of these practices with a Tbeoiy X mind.set will be limitedly successful, with employees seeing such techniques as disingenuous manipulations (Heil et aL, 2000; McGregor, 1966, 1967). At the heart of McGregor's argument is tbe notion that managers' assumptions/attitudes represent, potentially, self-fulfilling prophecies. Tbe manager who believes that people are inherently lazy and untrustworthy will treat employees in a manner tbat reflects tbese attitudes. Employees, sensing that there is little in the job to spur tbeir involvement, will exhibit litde interest and motivation. Consequendy, and ironically, the manager with low expectations will lament that "you can't get good help nowadays," oblivious as to the

JOURNAL OF MANAGERIAL ISSUES Vol. XX Number 2 Summer 2008

KOPELMAN, P R O T T A S AND

DAVIS

257

actual nature of cause and effect. Closing the self-reinforcing cycle, the manager feels vindicated; that is, his/ her low expectations were warranted. Conversely, the inaniigfr who believes that employees are generally trustwortliy and desirous of growth will facilitate their achievement. McGregor's explanation was that the manager had created conditiou-s that enabled "the individual to achieve his [ber] own goals (including those of self-actualization) besthy directing bis [her] efforts toward organizational goals'* (1967: 78). Subsequently, numerous, more intricate, psychological and social-psycbological niechanisins have been invoked to explain this phenomenon (e.g., Bandura and Locke, 2003; Eden, 1990; Heil et al, 2000; McNatt and Judge, 2004). McGregor (1957, 1967) noted tbat some businesses were adopting practices that could be expected to yield superior results, sucb as decenualization and delegation, job enlargement, participative/consultative mauagemcut. and performance appraisal. However, be also observed that tbese programs often were unsuccessful due to tbe way tbey were implemented. Wben tbose executing the programs did so witb Theory X attitudes or within organizations with Theory X climates, tbe programs would be likely to failperhaps another self-fulfilliug prophecy. Eden (1990) reported on numerous field experiments demonstrating that wben managers were led to bave high expectations of some subordinates (based on fictitious information), the subordinates outperformed tbeir peers. Attempting to apply tbis tludiug to leadersbip trainingbut witbout using deception Eden et al. found weak results in seven

field experiments, results they cbaracterized as "a disheartening ba-sis for practical application" (2000: 195). Indeed, Eden et al. went on to say tbat leadership training, in general, may be unrealistic; some managers "have it naturally and some do not, and tbose that do not canuot be trained, coaxed, or coached to bave it" (2000: 204; empbasis added). However, neither tbe early uor the latter studies by Eden and bis colleagues speak to McGregor's tbeorizing; in all of Flden etrt/.'sresearch, expectations were artificially manufactured. In contrast, McGregor's theory relates to organic differences in managers' assumptive worlds (or cosmologies). To wit: perhaps tbe Tbeory Y managers "have it" To our knowledge, only one field investigation (Fiman, 1973) bas been conducted that speaks directly to the posited effects of Theory Y managerial attitudes. In Finiau's study of female clerical employees and their supervisors in one corporation, a perceived Tbeory Y managerial orientation was posiuvcly related to job satisfaction but imrelated to job performance. Fiman's X/Yattitude items were never published and the only constiiict validity information Fiinan (1973) reported was split-balf reliability coefficients. Altbougb McGregor's Theory X/Y may be characterized as representing a dispositional mindset suggestive of a one-best-way to manage, McGregor recognized that a Tbeory Y managerial style will not be appropriate in all situations (Heil et at., 2000; McCiregor, 1967). In any event, before McGregor's theory and numerous theoretically-related propositions can be researched (see tbe Discussiou section), it is necessary to develop a construet-valid measure of the central
Summer 2008

JOURNAL OF MANAGERL\L ISSUES Vol. XX Number 2

258

THEORY X AND THEORY Y

concept. Accordingly, we sec the present endeavor as a critical first step in assessing the stibstantive validity of McGregor's tbeorizing. METHOD Sample We distributed surveys to undergraduate and graduate students in business at two east coast colleges from 2002 to 2006. Participation was voluntary and anonymous. The final sample consisted of 512 participants with a mean age of 28 years (using midpoints of categories and age 55 for 50+) and was 56% female. Nearly 80 percent of respondents were currently or recently employed, with 68% working in the private sector. Tbe largest categories of employment were financial seniccs (24%), bealth care (20%) and miscellaneous professional services (16%). Respondents tended to work for eitber very large organizations witb over 1,000 employees (44%) or small organizations with fewer than 100 (32%), with 24% working for organizations of intermediate size. Their mean annual salary was $55,800. Measures The survey consisted initially (N = 159) of four principal sections: 17 items measuring Theory X and Tbeory Y attitudes (drawn from two sources described below); 19 items measuring Theory X and Theory Y behaviors (drawn from two prior works); five items measuring faith in people; and five items measuring fast food opinions. Afifthsection consisting of three items relating to leisure time activities was added to the later version of the survey (N = 353). With regard to our theorized nomological

network, we reasoned that Theory X/ Y attitudes and asstimptions would be closely related to Theory X/Y behaviors and that Theory X/Y attitudes and behaviors would be positively btU distally related to generalized faith in people. However, we could see no reason why opinions about fast food meals and leisure-time activity preferences would be related to Tbeory X/Y attitudes or behaviors.
Theory X/Y Attitudes arid Assumptions

were assessed by 17 items (see Appendix) drawn from two sources. We incorporated ten items from a scale entitled "McGregor's Tbeory X-Y Test" (Swcnson, n.d.) and seven items were selected from the "Theory Y/Theory X Leadership Assumption Test" (Scanlon Leadership Network, n.d.). The latter source consisted initially of ten items, but tbree were dropped because tbey mirrored items in the first scale. All 17 items were scored on a five-point Likert scale with end-points ranging from "strongly disagree" to "strongly agree." Scanlon's Leadership Assiunption Test is a product of the Scanlon Leadership Network and the measure appeared on their website (www.scanlonleader.org). McGregor's Theory Y aligns with Scaulon's belief that organizations can be more effective if information is shared between managers and employees, and the latter are involved in problem solving. It might be noted that in both of McGregor's books (1960/1985, 1966) an entire chapter was devoted to the Scanlon Plan. There is no available evidence supporting tbe reliability and validity of tbe scores on eitber tbe Scanlon or tbe Sweuson measures. Cronbach alpha for these 17 items (hereafter, the '17-item X/Y attitude scale") was .78. It should be noted that the authors only became aware of Fiman's

JOURNAL OF MANAGERIAL ISSUES Vol. XX Number 2 Summer 2008

KOPELMAN, PROTTAS AND DAVIS

259

(1973) research after the present investigation was well underway. Likewise, we have recently discovered a few more scales published in organizalional behavior textbooks, some combining attitudes and behaviors; none with psychometric data or construct validity evidence. Two nonpublic-doniain instruments exist, one only available commercially (Teleometrics International, 1995). A list of all known X/^scales, including properties and construct validity evidence is provided in Table 1.
Theory X/Y Behaviors were assessed

evidence might be adduced from the occupational choices of the 4,585 nationwide college students who completed the instalment years ago (cf. Robinson and Shaver, 1973). Students with a high faitb-in-people score selected people-orieuted occupations such as social work, human resource management, and teaching. Both men and women with low scores tended to select occupations such a.s sales, finance, and advertising. Cronbach alpha in the present study was .55.
Fast Food Opinion Scale consisted of

by 19 items drawn from two sources. We incorporated 15 statements adapted from Costley and Todd's (1987) list of managerial actions that result from Theory X and Theory Y beliefs and we also used tbe four-item measure developed by Miles (1964). Costley and Todd (1987) listed seven actions that result from Theory X beliefs and six actions that result from Theory Y beliefs. We modified these items slightly to improve clarity. A sample item is: "The amount of responsibility given to employees should be limited and controlled." Miles' (1964) scale was originally developed to measure managers' attitudes about participative leadership policies. Miles' items were sligbtly modified (e.g., changing "subordinates" to "employees"). Response options used the above described fivepoint Likert scale. Cronbach alpha for these 19 items (hereafter, the "19item XA'bebavior scale") was .71. Faith in People was assessed by five items (two forced choice items and tbree agree-disagree statements) from Rosenberg (1957). Po.sitive responses indicate an absence of faitb in people; we reverse coded responses, witb scores ranging from 1 (low faith) to 6 (high faith). Validity

five items developed by tbe authors to measure opinions about fast food meals. A sample item is: "On the whole, I would say that a meal consisting of a McDonald's bamburger, fries and soda is an ideal meal." Response options used the same fivepoint Likert scale. Cronbach alpha for this study was .76.
Leisure-Time Activity items were also

developed by tbe authors to serve as unrelated measures. A sample item is: ' 'Roughly bow many bours per week do you spend watching television?" Respouse alternatives were 0-4 hours, 510 bours, and more than 10 hours, witb corresponding scores of 1 to 3, respectively. The otber two leisure items related to number of movies attended annually and hours per week spent reading for pleasure. Because each of tbe leisure time items entailed the expenditure ol" time, we fouud moderate levels of intercorrelaUons: rs of .27, .30, and .34. RESULTS It bas long been recognized tliat an assessment of the construct validity of a measure sbould precede substantive research (e.g., Schwab, 1980). Accordingly, we conducted a number of

JOURNAl, OF MANAGERIAL ISSUES Vol. XX Number 2 Summer 2008

260

ES

a V S

Ite ms
Publi shed
B bU

Source Yes
c B

Publi Doma Desc ripti 10 i ems. 5-poi scale

No
u

lomt?tHc/Co stru alidi tv Evid ice

publ shed

Osland, Kolb and (2001) Yes

CA

Beh avior Yes Yes

29 at titudin al ite 12 b(:havio ral ite unde fined i ating 15 it sms. 5 -poin scale 8 pa]rs o f forced state ments 10 p airs of force state ments
B U

JOURNAl. OF MANAGERIAL ISSUES Vol. XX Number 2 Summer 2008

Baron and Paulus

a
u

991)

tude

pub! ished
B

10.
CA

Gordon (1999)
<o

Attitu de an Beh avior

Xi 1-

3 fe

Teleometrics Inte aiion (1995)

Att tude

7 pa rs of f orcec state ments 12p airs of force state menls 36 it ems. 7 -pom o Z
scale

iqnd

Swenson (n. d.) E

Atti tude

a
o Z

Scanlon Institute (
u

Atti tude
c u

Yes
Yes
B

publ shed
publ shed latiotIS and a o

CN

Costley and Todd

Ofi B
>CA

1987 Yes Four items 5-po scale

E "

Beh avior
O

lOitt scale 10 it prov 0 sea

>

Miles (1964)
-o

Beh avior
Z
o

ariso ns of gr s

tyi

u S s a

" s' 3

Fiman (1973)
o Z

Attitu de an Beh avior Yes

half I eliabilit
B

Chapman (in Bor wski 2005)

en

THEORY X AND THEORY Y

Greenberg (1999)

u c o

tude Yes

publ ished
o .c
o 0

Beh avior

publ ished
o
0
CJ

-o

a:

ubin

ished
o

od

o u

-o

pub! ished
u
aj

ao

pj

f:

ihed rel bilit ations.

KOPEl.MAN, P R O T T A S AND

DAVIS

261

empirical analyses to develop a constmct-valid measure of Theory XA" attitudes. Table 2 presents descriptive statistics, reliabilities, and intercorrelations among ihe variables utilized in tbese analyses. Factor Analy?is and Creation of an Abbreviated Scale We perfonned CFA using structural equation modeling witli LISREL (Version 8.53; Joreskog and Sorbom, 2002). We specified a model using tbree "parcels" for eacb of tbe X/Y iittitude and X/Y bebavior scales and two "parcels" for each of the fast food opinion and trust in people scales. More specifically, the X/Y attitude and X/Y bebavior scale parcels were comprised of 6, 6, and 5 items and 6. 6, and 7 items, respectively, constituting all items of the two scales. Tbe two parcels related to eacb of the fast food and trust in people scales consisted of three and two items. Tbe CFA model's fit statistics (X^ = 42.10. df = 29, p = .055, xVdf = 1.45; GFI = .98; AGFI = .97; CFI, .99; NFI = .98; RMSEA = .03) showed tbat thf measurement model had very good fit. Tbe ratio of X"/t'f was be!ow the recommended value of 3 and tbe fit statistics values were at or above the recommended ihresbolds of 0.9 for NFI, above 0.8 for AGFI, and tbe RMSEA value was below the recommended value of 0.10 {Hair et aL. 1998). All X/Y attitude items loaded significantly on tbeir assigned latent constructs, although one of tbe parcels for X/Y bebaviors had a coefficient of .64, below the recommended threshold of .70, and the two parcels for fiist food loaded at .68 and .41. This model had a better fit tban alternative models where tbe tbree X/Y attitude and three X A bebavior

"parcels" were loaded onto a single latent variable {x^ = 274.73, df = 32. p = .00, xVdf = 8.59; GFI = .90; AGFI - .83; C:FI. .90; NFI = .89; RMSEA = .12) and wbere all ten parcels were loaded onto a single latent variable (x- = 597.51. df = 35, p = .00, xVdf = 17.08; GFI = .81; AGFI = .70; CFI. .69; NFI = .68; RMSEA = .18). Given tbe high degree of conceptual overlap among the 17 Theory X/ Y attitude items, we sougbt to determine if a shorter scale might be developed. We conducted a principal axis exploratoiy factor analysis (EFA) witb Varimax rotation using methodology similar to tbat employed by Kelly and Lee (2002) and' Sato (2003). (Principal axis factoring is tbe preferred exploratory-descriptive metbod of factor extraction when analyzing common variance. Orthogonal (i.e., rarimax) rotation yields factors that are maximally independent.) There are vaiying opinions concerning the sample si/e required to perform factor analysis, but it is generally accepted that 10 respondents per item is sufficient (Tinsley and Tinsley, 1987), and our sample provided more tban 20 cases per item. We first conducted EFA on tbe 17 itetiis, suppressing coefficient values (factor loadings) tbat were less tban .50. This analysis yielded four factors witb eigenvalues > LO. Tbe first factor, with an eigenvalue of 4.4, accounted for 26.1 % of tbe variance. Tbe second factor bad an eigenvalue of 1.30 and accounted for 7.6% of variance, and tbe remaining two factors together accotmted for 14.0%. Five items loaded above .50 on tbree factors. We tben conducted a second iteration of EFA, again suppressing coefficients less tban .50. Fotir items were retained, loading on a single facSummer 20()H

JOURNAL OF R^NAGERLVl, ISSUES Vol. XX Number 2

262

THEORY X AND THEORY Y

& E. c
V

>50 prise
r -1

o "(3 '3 o o
:fl

1 ^

Tt

o n

fN

<N

"A

oo

00

<?>

-t

CC

36

r-

80

JOURNAL OF MANAGERIAL ISSUES Vol. XX Number 2

Summer 2008

.47

79 10 43 56

44

30

89

24

15

28 2

o .2 -^

led.
S

KOPELMAN, P R O T T A S AND

DAVIS

263

Table 3 Factor Analysis of Theory X and Theory Y Attitude Items # 1. 2. 3. 4. Description of Items Most employees can't be trusted. Most employees will not exercise self-control and self-motivation - managers must do this for them. Most people are lazy and don't want to work. Most employees have little ambition. Loading .72 .61 .60 .57

Eigenvalue 2.16 Percent of explained variance 54.10 Note. These four items resulted from two consecutive principal axis factor analyses with suppression of coefficients less than .50. tor. The items and loadings are shown in Table 3. Replicating this analysis with an oblique (Oblimin) rather than a varimax rotation resulted in the same four items loading on a single factor. We used these four items to form a shortened measure of managers' underlying assumptions about their employees. We next examined internal consistency reliability estimates for all tbc measures in the present research, and reviewed evidence pertinent to the convergent, substantive, and discriminant validity of response scores using the new four-item Theory X/Y measure.
Reliabili^

cluding tbose in tlie new four-item X/Y scale) had tbe bighest reliabilityestimates (coefficient a = .78, .76, .72, .71, and .67, respectively). Four scales sbowed internal consistency e^ timates that exceeded Nunnally's (1978) .70 bencbmark. The (fiveitem) Faith in People scale had relatively low internal consistency reliability (a = .55), but adjusting for scale length (per tbe SpeamianBrown prophecy fornmla), alpba would have been .74.
Convergent, Substantive, and Discriminant Validity

Table 2 presents internal consistency reliability estimates (Cronbach a) on tbe diagonal. Alpha reliabilities ranged from .55 to .78. Tbe 17-item X/Y attitude scale, tbe Fast Food Opinion Scale, tbe new four-item X/ Y scale, the 19-item X/Y behavior scale, and tbe 13-item X/Y attitude scale (tbe 17 XAattitudinal items ex-

Conelations among tbe two measures of Theory X/Theory Y attitudesviz., the new four-item X/Y scale and the remaining 13 X/Y attitude itemsand the other key variables comprising the theorized nomological network are sunmiarized in Table 4. Tbe four-item X/Y scale was seen as conceptually identical to the 13-item X/Y scale, as closely related to tbe 19-item X/Y bebavior scale, as distally related to the more generic

JOURNAL OF MANAGERIAL ISSUES Vol, XX Number 2 Summer 2008

264

THEORY X AND THEORY Y

Table 4 Correlations among Closely and Distally Related Constructs Four-item XA' Attitudes 13-item XA' Attitudes

Variables

66*** Same Construct 5]*** Closely Related Construct (Behaviors)^ 22*** 25*** Distaliy Related Construct (Faith)'' -.01 01 Unrelated Constructs*^ Note. ^Four-itemX/Ycorrelated with 13-item X/Y-13; four-item XA'-4 and 13-item X/Y correlated with X/Y Behaviors; ''correlated with Faith in People; ""mean of correlations with the fast food opinion scale and the three leisure time pursuit items (/--to-z transformations). ***/?< .001, two-tailed. Faith in People scale, and unrelated to the Fast Food Opinion scale and the three leisure pursuit items. A strong relationship was found between the new lour-item measure and the 13-item X/Y attitude scale (r = .66), and this association exceeded the correlation between tbe new fouritem measure and the closely related construct of Theory X A behaviors (r = .51). Notably, thefour-itemX/Yattitude measure was more highly related to the 19-item X/Y behavior scale than was the 13-item X/Y attitude scale (r = .38). Both the fouritem and the 13-item X/Y measures were moderately related to the distally related constmct of Faith in People {rs = .25 and .22, respectively). As anticipated, mean correlations between the four- and 13-item X/Y attitude measures with the four conceptually unrelated measures (fast food attitude, movies attended, hours spent watching television, and hours spend reading for pleasure) were quite low at r = -.01 and r = -.01, respectively. Furtlier, neither the fournor 13-item X/Y attitude measure was sizably related to the four biograpbic variables measured: age, sex, salary, and tenure. Examining correlations using absolute numbers (because the coding of sex was arbitrary), rs ranged from .04 to .16 with the fouritem scale and from .09 to. 13 witb the 13-item pool. Overall, therefore, the pattern of associations is supportive of the theorized nomological network. We systematically controlled for the potential confounding effects of biographic variables by performing a hierarchical regression. Entering age, sex, salary, and tenure in Step 1, we regressed in Step 2 the four-item X/ Y measure on the six dependent variables comprising the nomological network (Model 1). We also performed this analysis by regressing the 13-item X/Y measure in Step 2 on the same dependent variables (Model 2).

JOURNAl. OF MANAGERIAL ISSUES Vol. XX Number 2 Summer 2008

KOPELMAN, PROTTAS AND DAVIS

265

As shown in Table 5, the Beta coefficient for tbe four-item X/Y scale wben regressed on the 13-item X/Y scales was .65 (almost identical to tbe simple bivariale correlation of .66). Similarly, Beta coefficients for associations between the four- and I3-iteni X/Y measures and the other six variables in tbe nomological net differed from correlations on average by about .03. Further, the significance of Step 2 (with the four-item measure as the independent variable) paralleled tbe tbeorized network of reladonsbips; F= 60.25 (same construct), F = 25.04 (closely related construct), F = 8.19 (distally-related construct), and for tbe four unrelated constructs, /'nmged from .94 to 2.65. We also performed a post hoc analysis to see if X/Y attitude scales were related to industry, along tbe lines of tbe prior research on occupadon and scores on tbe Faith in People scale. We compared 216 participants working in more caring iudustries (healthcare, travel, non-profit, public utility, and government) to 233 who worked in fiuiincial services, retail, and miscellaneous professional services (which included accountants, consultants, and attorneys). We found no significant difference in X/Y attitudes (for 17-item X/Y atdtude scale (/(447) = .30, p = .77, d = .03); however, we did replicate tbe earlier finding that tbe former Iiad greater faith in people (((446) = 2.84, ^ < .01, rf = .27). Further, we sought to examine the generalizability of our results by performing oui- EFA analyses separately for respondents witb less than three years of tenure on their currentjob and those witb three or more years of Job tenure. Using a cut-point of three years is meaningful because the US Bureau of Labor Statistics (US De-

partment of I^bor, 2006) reports tbat the median tenure of wage and salary workers in the private sector in 2006 was 8.6 years. The EFA results for the two subgroups yielded very similar four-item scales, and they would have beeu identical except one item loaded at .49 after the fust iteration and was dropped from the second EFA analysis, with the minimum loading for retention being .50. Tbe present evidence suggests tliat the new four-item measure of Theory X/Yassumptious/attitudes is psycbometrically sound and reasonably construct valid. Tbe scale taps most of the central concepts pertinent to Theory X/Yviz., whether employees are lazy, are trustworthy, are capable of self-control and self-nioti\atiou. aud have ambition. Accordingly, it would seem appropriate to use this measure in the conduct of substantive research regarding relationships between individual differences in X/Y assumptions/attitudes and variables related t<j human bebavior in organizations.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Sunirnarizing results, we bave described tbe development of a new four-item Tbeory X/V attitude measure and presented construct validity evidence. The measure is content valid, has adequate reliability, and behaves as postulated with respect to a tlieorized nomological network. Flowever, there are a number of limitations and areas for future research that need to be addressed. First, tbe present validation evidence was provided primarily by employees wbo also happened to be students. Altbougb we found veiy similar results upon splitting our sample based on years of work experience, it would be

JOURNAL OF MANAGERIAL ISSUES Vol. XX Number 2 Summer 2008

266

THEORY X AND THEORY Y

^ q 00 ro f ^ O O 00 O O

in

m m ^ O o oo

o o o o o

r~ in O O rn

1 3 u
u
3

O O

^ r^ ( N r*^ CO

q -H q q r^

81
r o O o O o "too

-H 73

* * (N m (N O

* *

in

* *S O

r- r- ts "n
( N O "

OS

(N * * * * *

si
TJ -w

c- 3 in ^
(N f*-) O CN O

o o ^
OS

* *

en c (N i

"O is

" 6

|2
c V

Q.
- w (U

a. 1 -g / 3

S
>H
(N

S -o J2 *- o ?
.,

dj _ u ^ X> _ ,
C O O r-i

J<1 f l O t l O tJ J
-N

s? - a o S ' - ' ' "

rj
^ - '

cd

^ c^ c^

o o o H HH

o ^ ^ ^ e k . o o o 5J S H =!.< < H H
Summer 2008

a j i o " ^ ^

JOURNAL OF MANAGERL\L ISSUES

Vol. XX Number 2

inde r spa e rea sons cond stef two- ailed

U5

OJ

<U

S
a

o c
ID

a
X) X3

o
[

V
Cl.

PS *

, KOPELMAN, PROTTAS AND DAVIS

267

desirable to examine data drawn directly from a field setting. Second, part of the construct validation process sbould include the examination of substantive results. We would have increased confidence in the validity of our measure it" we had collected data showing that work groups led by Theory Y managers had higher levels of employee creativity, and perhaps even superior levels of work-unit performance. Third, we view the new four-item Theory X/Y attitude measure as a start, and not the "final word" in terms of instrument development. Our pool of 17 items was comprised of far more Tlieoi^ X (13) than Theory Ystatements (four). This may have contributed to the fouritem Theory X/Y scale being comprised solely of Theory X statements. Accordingly, future research, drawing on an expanded and more evenly balanced set of Tbeory X/Y statenicnts, might yield a different, possibly muludimensional measure. This would empirically address one reviewer's suggestion that the four-item scale might be alternatively labeled a Theoiy X scale. Future research should also attempt to tease out generic versus personal attitudes (i.e., towards "employees in general" versus "me as an employee"). Perhaps the present research may sptir the undertaking of additional construct validation research. Yet, as we noted earlier, the paucity of substantive research on the effects of Theoi^Y managerial assumptions/ attitudes may be attributed to the absence of a construct valid measure that is freely available to researchers, How can McGregor's theory be tested if the focal construct has essentially gone unmeasured? Fiuthermore, interventions consistent with Theory Y attitudes, such as participative lead-

ership, should not be viewed as proxies for measuring managerial attitudes. Yet the key issue that seemingly has eluded most management scholars, even to this day, is that Theoiy Y pertains to an individual difference variable reflecting assumptions about people at workit is not a specific set of recommended management practices. For example, in his book review
of DnugUis McCWegor, Revisited, Jacobs

called the authorsHeil, Bennis. iind Stephensto task for balking "at involving workers to the degree contemplated in the Scanlon plans." rather instead endorsing "the diluted tonic of open book management as an acceptable substitute" (2004: 295). There are many fascinating substantive questions that can be researched now that the more fundamental task of construct validation has been initially addressed. We list a few below.
Coaching and Development Mc-

Gregor (1966) asserted that managerial attitudes reflect deep-seated (and possibly unconscious) beliefs; similarly, Locke (2003) observed that the Pygmalion effect does not operate consciously and that leaders deny that they treat different people differently. Perhaps tliis partially accounts for the difficulty Eden et al. (2000) encountered in using one- to three-day workshops to "train" managers to adopt successfully the Pygmalion Leadership Style. Along these lines, Heil et aL wrote: "Douglas McGregor's most important legacy was neither Theory X nor Theoiy Y. It was his insistence that managers question their core assumptions about buman nature. . . ." (2000: 20). Thus, our measure of Theory X/Y attitudes might sen'e as a self-administered diagnostic tool that enables managers
Vol. XX Number 2 Summer 2008

JOURNAI. OF MANAGERIAL ISSUES

268

THEORY X AND THEORY Y

to achieve greater self-awareness of their attitudes and assumptions about managing people at work. There has also been general agreement among both academics and practitioners tbat a new social/psychological contract has been emergingone tbat emphasizes new employer and employee responsibilities. Employers are now expected to provide training, education, and skill development opportunities, involve employees in decision making, and foster challenging and stimulating work oppoitunities; and employees are now responsible for developing their own careers, taking initiative, and participating in organizational decision making (Boswcll et ai, 2001). From this perspective, the new employment relationship assumes a Theory Y \iew witli respect to what employees are willing and able to contribute to the organization, vvilb corresponding employer responsibilities.
Boundary Conditions. Are tliere

boimdaiy conditions that moderate tbe eiFicacy of Theory Y managerial attitudes? Does organizational climate serve as one such boundaiy condition; for example, will a manager with Theory Y inclinations be le.ss successful in a command-and-control type of environment? Are Sutton and Woodman (1989) correct in their conjecture that a Theory Y managerial style will be more effective where the work entails challenge and uncertainty? Will employee expectations about bow they should be managed moderate tbe effectiveness of Theory Y assumptions/attitudes? Relatedly, there appears to be an increasing tendency for modern firms to adopt organic structures witli participative involvement-oriented cultures, empowered self-managed

teams, and managers serving as "coaches" or "facilitators." This is in contrast to traditional mechanistic structures with control-oriented cultures emphasizing managerial command and control (Stevens and Ash, 2001). Implicitly, the decision to empower workers and to assign corre.sponding managerial behaviors assumes a T'beory Y mindset, whereas the traditional manner of organizing work could be seen as more TTieory X. It is possible that it may be an oversimplification to categorize a manager as ha\ing either a Theory X or Theor\' Y mindset. According to leader-member exchange theory (Dansereau et aL, 1975), managers have different types of relationships with subordinates who are in-group members versus those who are outgroup members. Furthermore, Campbell and Swift (2006) found evidence tbat managers differ in whether they make internal or external attributions for good and bad performance, depending on whether the subordinate is an in-group member or not. It is possible that managers have a Tbeoiy Y mindset with respect to in-group members and a Theory X mindset with respect to out-group members and engage in correspondingly different managerial beba\'iors. Consequences. Most fundamentally, McGregor's theorizing about the effects of managerial assumptions has not been rigorously examined. Using field data, tbe hypothesis that work units led by managers with a Theory Y orientation will be generally more effective could be testedof course, wiUi performance data at the workunit level. Other theoretical issues might also be researchede.g., how enduring are the effects of a Theory Y orientation? Along these lines, Liden,

JOURNAL OF MANAGERIAL ISSUES Vol. XX Number 2 Summer 2008

KOPELMAN, P R O T T A S AND

DAVIS

269

Wayne and Stilwell (1993) found that initial managerial expectations influenced leader-member exchanges, but the effects on performance dissipated after six months. There is no shortage of books on leadership. Taylor (2004) reported that Amazon listed 59,366 book titles under the beading "leadership." Yet a survey of 40,000 workers from 350 organizations found thousands of examples of poor leadership (Taylor, 2004). Sample comments included: "They [supervisors] treat us like

criminals or as if we're on parole treating us like we mean nothing and they have no problem getting rid of us." "This is a very negative, control place. . . ." "I have a manager that doesn't listen and simply wants to be tlie boss." Perhaps if more managers operated according to Tbeoiy Y assumptions. Dilbert's day-to-day experiences witb tlie "pointy-haired boss" would be of less interest. But before we can test McGregor's Theory Y we must be able to measure tlie focal construct.

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17.

APPENDIX Items Measuring Theoiy X/Y Attitudes and Assumptions Most people will try to do as little work as possible. For most people, work is as natural as play or recreation. Most employees must be closely supervised to get them to perform up to expectations. Most employees actually prefer to be told exactly what to do rather than having to figure it out for themselves. Most employees do not care much about the organization's goals. Most employees would prefer increased responsibility to increased job security. Most people will not use their own initiative or do things that they have not been specifically assigned to do. Employees generally do not have much to contribute when asked to participate in making decisions or solving problems. It is just basic human nature people just naturally dislike work. Most employees will not exercise seli"-control and self-motivation managers must do this for them. Most employees have little ambition. Most people do want responsibility. Most employees prefer to have someone else set their goals and objectives. Most people work to cat and pay their bills rather than because they need to solve problems and be creative. Most employees prefer supervising tbemselves rather than close supervision. Most people are lazy and don't want to work. Most employees can't be trusted. References

Bandura, A. and E. A. Locke. 2003. "Negative SeIf-fRcacy and Goal Effects Revisited."/oma/ of Applied Psychology 88: 87-99.
JOURNAL OF MANAGERIAL ISSUES Vol. XX Number 2 Summer 2008

270

THEORY X AND THEORY Y

Baron, R. A. and P. B. Paulus. 1991. Understanding Human Relations: A Pratical Guide to People ai Work. New York, NY: Allyn and Bacon. Boswell, W. R., L. M. Moynihan, M. V. Roehling and M. A. Cavanaugh. 2001. "Responsibilities in the 'New Employment Relationship': An Empirical Test of an Assumed Vhcnonxenony foumal of Managerial Issues 13: 307-327. Campbell, C. R. and C. O. Swift. 2006. "Attributional Comparisons Across Biases and Leader-Member Exchange Status." foumal of Managerial Issues 18: 393408. Chapman, A. 2005. "X-Y Theory Questionnaire." In Organizational Behavior in Health Care. Ed. N. Borkowski. Boston, MA: Jones and Bardett. Cosdey, D. L. and R. Todd. 1987. Human Relations in Organizations {.Srd ed.). St. Paul, MN: West Publishing Company. Dansereau, F.,G.Graen and W. Haga. 1975. "A Vertical Dyad Linkage Approach to Leadership within Formal Organizations." Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 13: 46-78. Eden, D. 1990. Pygmalion in Management. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books. , D. Geller, A. Ciewirtz, L L Gordon-Terner, M. Liberman, Y. Pass, 1. Salomon-Segev and M. Shalit. 2000. "Implanting Pygmalion Leadership Style through Workshop Training: Seven Field Experiments." Leadership Quarterly 11: 171-210. Fiman, B. G. 1973. "An Investigation of the Relationships among Supervisory Attitudes, Behaviors, and Outputs: An Examination of McGregor's Theory Y." Personnel Psychology 26: 95-105. Gordon, J. R. 1999. Organizational Behavior: A Diagnostic Approach. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Greenberg, J. 1999. Managing Behavior in Organizations (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Hair,J. F., R. E. Anderson, R. L. Tatham and W. C. Black. 1998. Multivariate Data Analysis. Upper Saddle River, N[: Prentice Hall. Heil, G., W. Bennis and D. C. Stephens. 2000. Douglas McGregor, Rmnsited: Managing the Human Sid^ of the Enterpri.se. New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons. Jacobs, D. 2004. "Book Review Essay: Douglas McGregorThe Human Side of Enterprise in Peril." Academy of Management Revieiu 29: 293-311. Joreskog, K. G. and D. Sorbom. 2002. LISREL 8.53. Chicago, IL: Scientific Software International, Inc. Kelly, K. R. and W. Lee. 2002. "Mapping the Domain of Career Decision Problems." foumal of Vocational Behavior 6\: 302-326. Liden, R. C , S. J. Wayne and D. Stilwell. 1993. "A Longitudinal Study on the Early Development of Leader-Member Exchanges.'' Journal of Applied Psychology 78: 662-674. Locke, E. A. 2003. "Good Definitions: The Epistemological Foundation of Scientific Progress." In Organizational Behavior: The State of the Science (2nd ed.). Ed. J. Greenberg. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Eribaum Associates. McGregor, D. M. 1967. The Professional Manager. Eds. W. G. Bennis and C. McGregor. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. 1966. Leadership and Motivation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 1960/1985. The Human Side of Enterprise. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. JOURNAL OF MANAGERIAL ISSUES Vol. XX Number 2 Summer 2008

KOPELMAN, PROTTAS AND DAVIS

271

1957. "The Human Side of Enterprise." The Management Review 46: 2228. McNatt, D. B. and T. A. Judge. 2004. "Boundai7 Conditions of the Galatea Effect: A Field Experiment and Constructive Replication." Academy of Management Journal 47: 550-565. Miles, R. E. 1964. "Conflicdng Elements in Managerial Ideologies." Industrial Relations A: 77-91. Miner, J. B. 200B. "The Rated Importance, Scientific Validity, and Practical Usefulness of Organizational Behavior Theories: A Quantitative Review." Academy of Management Learning and Education 2: 250-268. 2002. Organizational Behavior: Foundations, Theories, and Analyses. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. NunnallyJ. C. 1978. Psychometric Theory (2nd Ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Osland, J. S., D. A. Kolb and I. M. Rubin. 2001. Organizational Behavior: An Expniential Approach (7th Ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Robinson, J. P. and P. R. Shaver. 1973. Measures of Social Psychological Attitudes (Rev. ed.). Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research. Rosenberg, M. 1957. Occupations and Values. Glencoe, IL: The Free Press. Sato, T. 2003. "Sociotropy and Autonomy: The Nature of Vulnerability." The foumal of Psychology 137: 447-466. Scanlon Leadership Network, n.d. Test Your leadership A.ssumptions. Retrieved Januai-y 3, 2003, from http://www.scanlonleader.org/Scanlon/ScanlonWebSite/ aboutus/ScanlonLeadership/leaderasstest.html Schwab, D. P. 1980. "Consu-uct Validity in Organizational Behavior." Research in Organizational Behavior (Vol. 2, 3: 43). Eds. L. L. Cummings and B. M. Staw. Greenwich, CT: JAI. Stevens, (;. and R. Ash. 2001. "Selecting Employees for Fit: Personality and Preferred Managerial Style.'' foumal of Managerial Issues 13: 500-517. Sutton, C. D. and R. W. Woodman. 1989. "Pygmalion Goes to Work: The Effects of Supemsor Expectations in a Retail Setting. "Joj/mw/ of Apfdied Psychology 74: 943-950. Swenson, D. n.d. McGregor's Theory X-Y Test. Retrieved January 3, 2003, from http://www.css.edu/users/dswenson/web/theoryxytest.html Taylor, C. R. 2004. "Retendon Leadership." r+/)58: 40-45. Tcleometrics International, Inc. 1995. Managerial Philosof>hy Scale. Waco, TX. Tinsley, E. A. and D.J. Tinsley. 1987. "Uses of Factor Analysis in Counseling Psychology ResGdsch." fournal of Coumeling Psychology 34: 414-424. U.S. Department of Labor Statistics. 2006. Employee Tenure Summary. USDL 061563. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor.

JOURNA[. OF MANAGERIAL ISSUES

Vol. XX Number 2

Summer 2008