Archives For May 2010

EBM: X&Y

David Burkus —  May 26, 2010

Theory X and Theory Y are theories of human motivation created and developed by Douglas McGregor at the MIT Sloan School of Management in the 1960s. The theories describe two very different attitudes toward workforce motivation. McGregor felt that companies followed either one or the other approach.

In Theory X, management assumes employees are inherently lazy, dislike work and will avoid it if they can. Management believes that workers need to be closely supervised and comprehensive systems of controls developed. A hierarchical structure is needed with narrow span of control at each and every level. According to this theory, employees will show little ambition without enticing incentive programs and will avoid responsibility whenever they can. These ideas have been proven counter-effective in most modern practice.

In Theory Y, management assumes employees may be ambitious and self-motivated and exercise self-control. It is believed that employees enjoy their mental and physical work duties. They possess the ability for creative problem solving, but their talents are underused in most organizations. Given the proper conditions, theory Y managers believe that employees will learn to seek out and accept responsibility and to exercise self-control and self-direction in accomplishing objectives to which they are committed.

For McGregor, Theory X and Y are not different sides of the same coin. Rather they are two different coins all together. If managers felt the need to apply Theory X principles, that does not preclude them from being a part of Theory Y. McGregor incorporated Maslow’s hierarchy of needs into his theories. He grouped Maslow’s hierarchy into “lower order” (Theory X) needs and “higher order” (Theory Y) needs. As the influence of McGregor and Maslow’s writings spread, management theorists soon realized the possibility of connecting higher level needs to worker motivation.

Charlene Li made a splash a few years ago when she co-authored Groundswell. Through Groundswell, many leaders saw the need to make their organizations more open using social media. But just how to do it remains a mystery. In Open Leadership, Li seeks to teach her readers how to demonstrate open leadership and transform their organizations in the process.

Open leadership is “having the confidence and humility to give up the need to be in control while inspiring commitment from people to accomplish goals” (p. 14). Leaders accomplish this by having an open mind-set – the ability to let go of control. Organizations must recognize that they are not in control – their customers, employees, and partners are.

Open leadership is about new relationships, and new relationships need new guidelines. The book outlines some suggestions for become an open leader, among them:

1. Respect that your customers and employees have power.

2. Share constantly to build trust.

3. Nurture curiosity and humility.

4. Hold openness accountable.

5. Forgive failure.

Inside open leadership are touches of transformational leadership. It’s hard to convince followers that you consider them individually without embracing social media. However if you do, you have the opportunity to create near-personal relationships with customers and employees.

Like in Groundswell, Li uses a variety of case studies, but also diagnostic exercises, checklists, rich examples, and systematic approach to open leadership. Through these tools, any leader with an open mindset can follow her advice and get results.

Open Leadership will be available on May 24, 2010. I recommend that and leader interested in social media pick it up. More so, I implore any leader NOT interested in social media to read it even more throughly.

EBM: Bureaucracy

David Burkus —  May 19, 2010

Bureaucracy is used so often in such negative terms, most who use it forget its roots. Bureaucracy in its ideal sense, according to its most influential thought leader Max Weber, can be a positive term. At the time, the ideal bureaucracy was a more rational and efficient form of organization than the available alternatives. According to Weber, the attributes of modern bureaucracy include its impersonality, concentration of the means of administration, a leveling effect on social and economic differences and implementation of a system of authority that is practically indestructible.

Weber set down seven principles with which to govern a bureaucratic organization:

  • Business conducted on a continuously.
  • Business conducted with strict accordance to the following rules:
    • Officials must do certain types of work.
    • Official must have the authority to perform their assigned functions
    • Officials’ means of coercion must strictly defined and limited.
  • Officials’ responsibilities and authority are part of a vertical hierarchy of authority, with respective rights of supervision and appeal.
  • Officials are accountable for their use of the resources needed to perform, but do not own these resources.
  • Official and private business and income must be separated strictly.
  • Offices cannot be appropriated by their incumbents.
  • Business is conducted on the basis of written documents.

Each of these seven principles must be present for a bureaucracy to function efficiently. Max Weber himself remarked that ideal bureaucracy is difficult to attain. Most often, the degradation of bureaucracy can lead to overspecialization, groupthink and even organizational inertia. With both strengths and weaknesses, the principles of bureaucracy laid a foundation still in use in modern organizations.

In his classic work, Good to Great, Jim Collins makes the case for how organizations and leaders must confront the brutal facts. Years later, most of us are believers, but fewer are practitioners. One of the reasons for this is a lack of know-how. To help solve this dilemma, Jeff Hayzlett brings us The Mirror Test.

Hayzlett, a man known for his energetic and enthusiastic style, offers this advice in a non-sense, practical or bust style. He sets out questions that many leaders fail to ask, out of fear or ignorance, and uses copious personal examples to make the case for why they must. Leaders have to look at what’s work and what’s not and then, perhaps more importantly, look for the why behind each of these.

In The Mirror Test, Hayzlett teaches his readers how to give the Mirror Test, why companies must adapt or die and why the bottom line of any business will always be…the bottom line. This book is less technical or methodic and more a collection of interesting and memorable stories from Hayzlett’s experience. This is a great way to present the information because you will remember these stories, long after you’ve forgotten what your MBA textbook said.

Tim Hartford, author of The Logic of Life, does a great job applying economic theory to the workplace. Does tournament theory really explain management high salaries?