Management
Practices
Zackaree Hood
Business Thought 1050
Basil Chelemes
5/8/2014
O
ver the last few centuries, the styles of management and leadership have changed
drastically. We started with whips and chains with slave labor and have slowly
progressed to today’s modern workplace. How did we make the transition and what
has happened along the way? We will compare & contrast three popular management styles and
explain why one of these styles, Theory Y, is the preferred of the three in the 21st century for the
laborer’s perspective.
Generations that have been born recently believe that slavery took place a long time ago,
however that is not the case. The United States Civil War took place in 1861-1865, only one
hundred and fifty years ago. During that time we still had slavery present in the United States.
The war ended with the abolishment of slavery. Andrew Carnegie notes “The fact is, labor then
had no right which the chief, or employer, was bound to respect.” (Carnegie, Andrew. (2011)
Foundations of Business Thought. (8th Ed.). New York, NY: Pearson. P.458). We hear the
common cries of today’s workforce stating that they are underpaid and less fortunate, however I
remain in a state of gratitude to be compensated for my work.
As we began the abolishment of slavery in the late 1800’s and migrated towards the
skeleton structure of today’s workforce of the twentieth century, a new management style was
developed. This style was created due to the Industrial Age and the development of large
corporations. These organizations ran into issues of efficiency and labor costs became vital. A
man by the name of Frederick Winslow Taylor, a mechanical engineer, published his findings of
the study of labor into The Principles of Scientific Management. Taylor encouraged management
to use scientific studies to increase the productivity of the workforce.
As a consequence of the implementation of Scientific Management into the workplace,
many more manager roles needed to be fulfilled, often causing friction. “Scientific management's
application was contingent on a high level of managerial control over employee work practices.
This necessitated a higher ratio of managerial workers to laborers than previous management
methods. The great difficulty in accurately differentiating any such intelligent, detail-oriented
management from mere misguided micromanagement also caused interpersonal friction between
workers and managers.” (Scientific Management. (n.d.). In Wikipedia. Retrieved May 4th, 2014,
from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_management)
Micromanagement is an extreme discomfort for a solid majority of the workforce as seen
with Mike Lefevre. Lefevre states about micromanagement, “Hell, if you whip a damn mule he
might kick you. Stay out of my way, that's all. Working is bad enough, don't bug me. I would
rather work my ass off for eight hours a day with nobody watching me than five minutes with a
guy watching me.” (Terkel, Studs. "Mike LeFevre: Who Built the Pyramids?" Working: people
talk about what they do all day and how they feel about what they do. New York: Pantheon
Books, 1974. 1-10)
Micromanagement essentially brings about the next management style, Theory X. This
management style has had a strong presence in the workforce for the last century. Characteristics
of this style of management are but not limited to: the belief that man is by nature indolent-he
works as little as possible or the minimum required to retain his position, that the laborer lacks
ambition, dislikes responsibility, prefers to be led, is resistant to change and that the laborer is
gullible and not very bright. (McGregor, Douglas. (2011) Foundations of Business Thought. (8th
Ed.). New York, NY: Pearson. P.476) This autocratic style of leadership believes that in order to
lead, they must command and undermine their labor while monitoring their labor studiously and
threaten them to gain control.
Due to the practice and fulfillment of Theory X, it creates dissonance, lowers morale and
drives away talent. This fact proves that this is not likely the best management theory. It is
important to note though however that this style of leadership is appropriate for particular
employees that need to be cracked down on. In this case, it is not likely that this employee is
typically a good fit for the company as he/she does not mesh with the corporate culture.
The alternative view to the aforementioned theory is Theory Y. This theory is relatively
newer to the workforce and in my own opinion, a theory of positivity, innovation, and it allows
for self-fulfillment. This theory operates off the principle that: people are naturally motivated,
will create their own goals and motivation, they are creative problem solvers, they seek added
responsibility, and need intellectual stimulation. (Solomon, Michael, Poatsy, Mary, & Martin,
Kendall. (2013) Better Business. (3rd Ed.). New York, NY: Pearson. P.233). In an informal class
poll, the professor asked the students if they would prefer either a Theory X or a Theory Y
manager. Denoting their vote through a show of hands, not one single student raised their hand
for a Theory X manager. This proves that labor does indeed prefer a Theory Y manager.
So labor is in favor of Theory Y, but what does management have to say about their
preferred style? After all, management and capital are the ones that are employing these people.
Organizations such as McDonald’s and IBM have found great results employing a healthy
balance of Theory X and Theory Y combined. Peters and Watterman call it “simultaneous loosetight properties” in their book The Pursuit of Excellence. As far as the perspective of labor, I can
see why laborers prefer the use of Theory Y, and same goes for the perspective of management
employing a healthy mix of the both. If one becomes too lenient with their labor, it invites the
opportunity for misconduct and lowered productivity.
In my own opinion, labor should be handed just enough rope to hang them selves with. I
would allow the opportunity for growth and innovation but monitor the productivity to maximize
my expenses. As we continue to progress with time, it is my belief that the workforce will begin
to utilize Theory Y more often. This shall add a further responsibility to management to monitor
the metrics of employees without having to directly stand over them. Theory Y is instrumental in
innovation and important management philosophy that should be employed or mixed into the
managements’ practice.
Sources Cited
(Solomon, Michael, Poatsy, Mary, & Martin, Kendall. (2013) Better Business. (3rd Ed.). New
York, NY: Pearson. P.233)
(McGregor, Douglas. (2011) Foundations of Business Thought. (8th Ed.). New York, NY:
Pearson. P.476)
(Terkel, Studs. "Mike LeFevre: Who Built the Pyramids?" Working: people talk about what they
do all day and how they feel about what they do. New York: Pantheon Books, 1974. 1-10)
(Scientific Management. (n.d.). In Wikipedia. Retrieved May 4th, 2014, from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_management)
(Carnegie, Andrew. (2011) Foundations of Business Thought. (8th Ed.). New York, NY: Pearson.
P.458)