Theories x, y and z of Douglas McGregor as key elements in the development of a system of knowledge about the motivation of personnel to work. Theory X and Theory Y by Douglas McGregor

13.10.2019

Born 1906 Received Ph.D. from Harvard University in 1934 d. Lecturer at Harvard University Transferred to Massachusetts University in 1937 Institute of Technology(MIT) was Principal of Antioch College. Returned to MIT in 1954. Died in 1964.

Theory X: the person is lazy and tends to avoid work strict guidance and control are the main methods of management; workers are not very ambitious, afraid of responsibility and want to be led in the behavior of workers is dominated by the desire for safety. to achieve the goals, it is necessary to force employees to work under the threat of sanctions, while not forgetting about remuneration

People are lazy They don't like work To make people work they need to be controlled, directed and held under penalty They avoid responsibility They have no ambition People are lazy They work as little as possible To make people work they need to be controlled, directed and held under penalty They avoid responsibility They have no ambition Resist change Negative motivation based on fear of punishment should prevail in the activities of the leader.

Theory Y 1 unwillingness to work is not an innate quality of the worker, but a consequence of poor working conditions that suppress the innate love for work; 3 the best remedies achievement of the goals of the organization - reward and personal development 2 with a favorable, successful past experience, employees tend to take responsibility 4 with good conditions employees form in themselves such qualities as self-discipline and self-control; 5 the labor potential of workers is higher than is commonly believed In modern production, their creative capabilities are used only partially

People love work They manage themselves according to goals They take responsibility They are ambitious and creative People love work They manage themselves according to goals They are motivated They take responsibility They are ambitious and creative If not want to work, it means that the appropriate conditions have not been created for them. It is necessary to provide workers with more freedom to exercise independence and creativity.

Conclusions: Theory X: The activities of the leader should be dominated by the motivation of subordinates, based on the fear of punishment. Theory Y: it is necessary to provide employees with more freedom to show initiative, creativity and create favorable conditions for this.

Employees must be used, taking into account the specific state of consciousness and motivation of employees. Managers should strive to develop the group, if it is not sufficiently motivated, from the state of "X" to the state of "Y", or from the state of "economic man" to "social man". Theory Z Theory Z

A. Maslow's theory of needs physiological needs (food, drink, sleep, sexual needs, clothing, housing); needs for security and confidence in the future (needs for the physical security of the individual, stability, security, the need for order, laws and boundaries. In the refraction of the enterprise, this means labor protection, insurance, a clear system of norms and rules, protection from arbitrariness, the absence of fear of loss benefits and benefits achieved, etc.)

A theory of needs. Maslow's need in love (since the need for love and the need for sex are often confused, this level is better defined as social needs). This concept includes a sense of belonging to something or someone, a feeling that others accept you, a feeling of reciprocity, affection and support, the need to identify the individual with the goals of the group, the goals of the enterprise;

A. Maslow's theory of needs the need for respect or the need for personality differentiation (the need for recognition, respect, self-respect, the attention of other people, promotion, the need for power, status, title, belief in one's own abilities) the need for self-realization (the need for realization their potential and growth as a person, success in achieving goals, solving tasks, obtaining and understanding information, fulfilling creative tasks, independence in making and implementing decisions, influencing the external environment by implementing their ideas, etc.).

Motivational profile of F. Herzberg Each of us is driven by 2 factors: the need to avoid suffering; the need for psychological growth. The company needs to create: hygiene factors(prevention of dissatisfaction) motivators (give satisfaction, motivation for achievements) Methods of identifying surveys, tests, observation, business communication.

Vroom's expectancy theory Motivation = (Z-R) × (P-B) × (HC), where (Z-R) is the cost of labor - the results of the effort will give the desired results; there should be a high but realistic level of requirements. (Р-В) - these are results - reward - the expectation that a certain reward will be received for a certain result; a firm relationship must be established between the result and remuneration only for efficient work. HC is Satisfaction with the Reward Rewards must be valuable and meet needs

The theory of justice and equality (A. Adamson) People perceive remuneration subjectively and compare it with the remuneration of other people for similar work, and if an employee finds his remuneration unfair, then he significantly reduces the productivity and quality of work.

Situation for analysis You are employee A (Aleksey). Your colleague, employee B (Boris) works with you in the same department, performs similar tasks. Your manager R (Roman) noted Alexey's work in the current quarter. You know that an order has been prepared to reward Alexei. You are convinced that you do no less work than Alexey and work no worse than him. At the same time, your work is not marked by anything. What is your reaction? Your actions?

You tell me what you need, maybe I'll give you what you want! Motivation cannot solve all problems, although it is often viewed as a perpetual motion machine for high performance. When solving the problems of employee motivation, the manager must always remember that the productivity of an employee consists of three components: - the ability to work productively, - the ability to work productively, - the readiness to work productively. It makes sense to talk about the third component only after the provision of the first two components!

McGregor's Theory X and Y - this is a theory of behavior in the management structure and the motivation of subordinates to working conditions.

In management, this theory refers to the theories of leadership and power, to procedural motivation, which highlights the degree of control over employees, as well as the behavior of the manager, leader, his actions.

McGregor's X and Y Theory

McGregor, when developing his theories "X" and "Y", considered the motivation of the employee and the behavior of the company's manager from two sides, in two approaches. Therefore, they received different directions, which were called: “Theory X” and “Theory Y”.

Let's consider each of the theories separately.

McGregor Theory X:

People are inert by nature, at the first opportunity they shirk in every possible way;
Lack of ambition in a person, gets rid of responsibility, works under guidance;
The basic principle of the employee is his security;
Control, pressure and the threat of punishment makes a person work effectively.

McGregor's Theory Wu:

Work is considered to be a characteristic process for a person.
Favorable working conditions contribute to the development of self-control and responsibility;
The creative solution and the intellectual potential are partially used;
When a specific goal is achieved, it is encouraged by a reward.

McGregor's Theory X and Y was proposed in 1960 and published under the title The Human Side of the Enterprise.

McGregor's Theory of Motivation are approaches that were considered consequences of views on the natural qualities of a person, and appeared in the form of an autocratic, negative theory "X", and a democratic, positive theory "Y". The theory is built on the concept of premises and assumptions, as well as the analysis of the relationship of leaders to subordinates.

McGregor's first theory "X" was not true. It currently does not meet our requirements.
McGregor's second theory "Y" states that a person is able to be self-directed and creative, it is only necessary to choose the right motivation.

From the above, we see that there is a significant difference in the two theories.
Therefore, the manager in his practice should adhere mainly to McGregor's "U" theory.

Douglas McGregor theory X and Y

Douglas McGregor remained in my memory as an excellent manager, witty, observant. Has respect from subordinates. He believed and knew that a person is naturally endowed with enthusiasm, moral and responsible.

But in his theory "X" went from the opposite, thereby changing the practice, the theory of management. No wonder D. McGregor, his scientific work in the direction of leadership is intended for leaders, which are currently being reprinted and published.

The procedural theory of motivation, Douglas McGregor's theory of X and Y, describes the control over employees according to the following parameters:

Tasks;
Quality performance of this task;
Time of issuance and completion of the task;
Auxiliary methods for the implementation of the task;
Implementation of safety instructions during work;
Persuasion of the employee in the feasibility of the task;
A promise for a successful completion of a worthy bonus;
Dedication of the employee to the difficulties associated with work.

A. Maslow writes that many managers are convinced that workers are controlled by any needs from low levels, i.e. according to the "X" theory. McGregor confirms this approach of managers, which manifests itself in a disguised or overt form.

In turn, McGregor promotes the theory of "U", the idea of the general participation of company members in the process of preparation and decisions, giving managers responsibility for the employee and the ability to accept risk as a factor of personal motivation.

The brilliance of MacGregor's "X" and "Y" theory has drawn both recognition and criticism for its simple view of the problem.

Douglas McGregor Theory

McGregor's Theory X and Y provide actions for the manager:

Structuring the work of subordinates;
Do not allow employees the freedom to implement decisions;
Each worker has his own task;
Check work and execution;
Failure to complete the task on time, the manager can apply a psychological onslaught.

Consequently, the manager of the unit tightly and in a timely manner, within the limits of his competence, ensures the implementation of the plan.

The manager prefers to influence the subordinate with mechanisms that appeal to the needs of a high stage (level): huge goals, self-expression and autonomy, the need for belonging. The manager should avoid imposing his will on the worker.

McGregor argued that the dominance of the democratic style in the organization characterizes a high degree of decentralization of powers. Putting great efforts to create an atmosphere of trust and openness, an employee who needs help will turn to the manager. By creating a two-way appeal, the manager himself plays the main role - guiding.

McGregor's X and Y theory in brief about the manager

This theory of motivation refers to the procedural, which describes the behavior and types of managers. They are also part of the team, the behavior and motivation of their work are characteristic.

The behavioral characteristics of the manager include: control over employees, which can be an authoritarian and democratic leadership.

Authoritarian leadership characterized by the centralization of power, strict and constant control over a certain category of workers who are psychasthenoids by type. Subordinates belong to theory X: they do not show initiative in work, they obey the leader, they are offended by bad demands, low wages.

Democratic leadership observes the delegation of authority, full agreement in the team, psychological needs (so that employees are valued, respected, praised), taking into account the motivation of employees, improving the content of the task, which corresponds to the theory of W.

Example:
Some of the bosses can afford to shout, swear at their subordinates. But the employees forgive him these habits, work well, conscientiously, because in difficult times the head of the unit will help them, protect them, defend their interests before the higher management.

McGregor's theories X and Y have the right to continue to exist. In practice, they are found in combination with other management styles. References to these theories in today's world are not uncommon in manuals for practical application on the management of members of the enterprise and the motivation of employees.

McGregor's Theory X and Y has a double meaning, where Theory X determines the internal position only of the leader. And the Y theory unites the manager with the subordinates by mutual understanding. The manager takes care of the needs of the company, his subordinates, their needs. Subordinates bring great benefits to the company.

As a specialist in social psychology, Douglas McGregor, Ph.D., has long been involved in management issues. After the end of World War II, his name was closely associated with brilliant ideas in this area.

Unfortunately, Douglas MacGregor contributed to management only through one completed work. This work was the only one that the scientist could present to the world before death took him at the age of 57. Douglas McGregor's Theory X and Y and several draft papers that were never completed are the only legacy of this American sociologist.

McGregor's main idea on X

Douglas MacGregor made two suggestions regarding human nature behavior. In the course of research, he noticed how dual the human essence can be.

For example, Douglas McGregor's Theory X suggests a negative view of people.

It characterizes a person as someone who:

possesses ambition (even to a small extent this trait is inherent in all);
does not like to work;
seeks to avoid responsibility;
can work effectively only under the strictest supervision.

McGregor's main idea for Y

In turn, Douglas McGregor's theory Y characterizes a person from a positive point of view.

It shows a person as a person who is capable of:

to self-organization;
take responsibility;
perceive work as a natural thing, comparable to play or rest.

These conflicting theories were put forward on the basis of the research.

Determining parameters of the theory

There are a number of underlying factors that Douglas McGregor has analyzed. The theory of x and y is based on the activities of the performer at his workplace. As a result of the study, it was revealed that there are certain parameters that determine the actions of the performer. By taking them under his control, the manager will be able to control the actions of his subordinates.

These settings are based on:

tasks assigned to subordinates;
time of receipt of tasks;
beliefs possessed by a subordinate, in a guarantee of receiving appropriate remuneration;
the quality of performance of work tasks;
expected time to complete tasks;
the team (close environment) in which the subordinate works;
funds provided for the execution of tasks;
instructions issued by management;
the beliefs of the subordinate in getting him what he can to complete the task;
the amount of remuneration guaranteed for successfully completed work;
the level of involvement of the subordinate in the problem area associated with the task.

Douglas MacGregor expressed the opinion that the provisions relating to Theory Y are closer to the truth. They more accurately reflect the essence of employees, so it is these provisions that should be taken into account when building a management strategy and practice.

Theory X: its main provisions

The provisions relating to Theory X are as follows:

Based on their nature, employees have a sharply negative attitude towards work. They try to avoid it by any means, if the conditions favor it.
To achieve the desired result, subordinates should be forced to work. The employee must be under strict supervision. An alternative to this may be the threat of punishment for poor performance.
Employees practice tactics of avoiding assigned duties. For the further execution of the work, formal instructions are required almost every time the prerequisites for this arise.
The priority for most of the workers is, first of all, a sense of security, and only then all other factors that are related to work. As a rule, under such conditions, great ambition is rarely shown.

Theory Y: its main provisions

This theory by Douglas McGregor includes the following:

The perception of work is accepted by employees in the same natural form as play or recreation.
Provided that the staff of their company is dedicated and focused on getting a good result in the course of work, no additional instructions and control from the outside will be required.
The average person can learn to take responsibility for their activities and even learn to develop a desire for it.
Among the population, the ability to accept right decisions is fairly widespread. This ability is not necessarily inherent in management personnel.

Theory X: clarification of the first proposition

Douglas McGregor points out that the assumptions that are inherent in Theory X are quite widespread in the literature on organizations. In reality, management practice and policy use these provisions extremely rarely.

Given that the average person is born with a sense of dislike for work, McGregor was able to trace even the history of the development of this position and identify the emphasis that guides managers. They are voicing concern about the likely curtailment of production volumes. This leads to the formation of a special system of individual remuneration. Her role fully shows that at the basis of this system is the belief that management efforts are needed to combat the propensity of a person to shy away from work.

Theory X: clarification of the second proposition

The second point follows from the above. Given the innate reluctance of a person to work, there is a need for certain actions on the part of management.

These actions are to:

to force an individual to perform work;
exercise control;
direct his action;
practice a policy of intimidation against the majority of individuals.

All these actions are aimed at forcing individuals to make their own contribution to the achievement of the overall goals of the organization.

In this case, the conclusion suggests itself that the reward system is not a guarantee of the successful completion of tasks by the employee. Only the threat of punishment can become a compelling factor. And all this stems from the belief that people can do work only under the influence of external coercion and control.

Theory X: clarification of the third proposition

The third proposition states that the average individual would prefer to be controlled from the outside. He is afraid of responsibility, is not characterized by the presence of special ambitions, and in his activities seeks, first of all, security.

Despite the fact that America's social and political values speak of the presence ideal virtues the average person, most of the managers in real life live by the conviction that "the masses are mediocre."

On the basis of the highlighted provisions, McGregor makes attempts to prove that this intellectual scheme is not abstract. It is widely used in the management practice of the modern world.

Explanation of the theory

The provisions that are within the framework of Theory X have been criticized by McGregor. According to the Wu theory, a person spends his mental and physical strength not only on rest or play, but also on work, which indicates the natural nature of this expenditure. Therefore, the average individual will not necessarily show dislike for the performance of the assigned tasks.

There is no need for external control in such conditions. The person will be subjected to self-management and self-control, for which the reward functions are responsible, which the person associates with his own achievements. Moreover, on the part of the individual, the most valuable reward for the labors is the feeling of satisfaction of one's needs for self-realization and self-affirmation.

It is these aspirations that form the basis for achieving the goals of the organization in the framework of the theory of W.

Theories X and Y (eng. Theory X and Theory Y) are theories of people's motivation and behavior in management.

These theories were proposed by the American social psychologist Douglas McGregor in 1960 in The Human Side of Enterprise. McGregor believed that there are two types of personnel management, one of them is based on "Theory X", the other - on "Theory Y".

Based on reading the book The Human Side of Enterprise:

McGregor died in 1964, having made a significant contribution to the theory and practice of management, and his creative legacy will remain the subject of research for a long time to come. Even half a century after its publication, journalists and scientists refer to this regularly republished book! If you manage people, but still haven't read McGregor's book, you should hurry up.

"Theory X"

What do you think is the most effective method of managing people? According to Theory X, people are inherently lazy and work only under duress. At one time, “theory X” was the most common approach to management, but today it seems outdated - for three reasons:

1. It relies on outdated paradigms. Hierarchical models like the army or the church are not applicable in today's business. For example, today the members of work groups often do not report to a single boss, but solve the problems of several departments at once.

2. She's too abstract. "Theory X" does not take into account the political, social and economic conditions activities of an individual company.

3. It comes from wrong assumptions about human nature. For example, this theory suggests that people can only work under duress. However, any coercion has its limits. Often people work much better under the influence of persuasion or interest in working together.

For this reason, such managers, for the common good of the company, tend to carefully control the activities of their subordinates, assuming that people are not willing to voluntarily take responsibility, since they are only interested in salary. It seems to them that subordinates do not see the big picture of affairs or do not care about the success of the company as a whole. In other words, “Theory X” leaders believe that subordinates work only when someone is constantly watching them.

“Theory X” is based on three premises:

1. People don't want to work. Man has an innate aversion to work and tries to avoid it. Production quotas, target milestones, and time clocks are managers' responses to people's natural tendency to shirk.

2. Coercion is inevitable. The company will not achieve its goals without coercion and intimidation of its employees. Their only incentive to work is punishment, not reward. Promotions, bonuses and benefits only increase the demands of a person, and do not arouse the desire to work hard.

3. People try to avoid responsibility. All they want from life is a quiet job with a regular salary.

What is the fallacy of "Theory X"

In Theory X companies, there is an atmosphere of suspicion that stifles people's natural desire for excellence. First of all, they are frightened off by the fact that the authorities minimize the opportunities for creative self-expression. When an employee suspects that he is in danger of being fired, he begins to think exclusively about self-preservation and is extremely reluctant to take risks - for fear that his bosses will not approve of his actions and even punish him for them.

Yet executives who believe in “Theory X” believe that any grouping of employees is a threat, as it can hinder the success of the company. Therefore, instead of encouraging collective interaction, such leaders in every possible way try to sow enmity between employees.

Often managers fail to understand why high salaries, medical benefits, good vacation pay, sick pay, and generous pension contributions do little to motivate subordinates. The fact is that all these measures are not enough. First of all, a person would like to know what is doing important and meaningful work. He wants to feel that his opinion is taken into account. Therefore, as soon as he realizes that the company does not appreciate what he does, indifference takes possession of him, he begins to treat his business formally and, when doing work, first of all seeks not to give a reason for dismissal.

“Theory Y”

If "theory X" is wrong, what is its alternative? “Theory Y” offers a completely different approach to managing people: bosses should respect subordinates and give them the opportunity to act independently in order to arouse in them the desire to follow. moral principles and keep discipline. According to “Theory Y”, if the staff does not show interest in the work and does not follow orders, then the fault should not be the employees, but poor management. “Theory Y” comes from the following postulates:

People don't have an innate dislike for work. Under certain conditions, employees enjoy what they do.

Employees do not have to be kept in fear. Properly motivated employees will work without prodding and make active efforts to meet the challenges facing the company.

The feeling of success gives people pleasure. Achieved success builds self-confidence, and as a result, employees are even more committed to achieving their goals.

People want to do responsible work. It is not true that man is by nature lazy and irresponsible. In fact, he, on the contrary, is looking for any opportunity to do responsible work.

Human beings are naturally endowed with the ability to be creative. Most people are capable of creative problem solving.

People are smart and smart. Leaders often underestimate intellectual ability their subordinates.

"Theory X" claims that internal politics company should be determined by its management, without consulting the staff about anything. According to Theory Y, management should take into account both the needs of the company as a whole and the needs of its employees, who, in turn, would like to benefit their organization.

Differences between the two theories

In companies whose management is based on “theory X”, importance given a formal hierarchy. Consider the example of quality control work. When an inspector from the QCD, checking the products of one of the departments, discovers a problem, he reports it to his immediate supervisor.

The latter passes this information to the deputy head of the department, who notifies the head of the department, and he calls the deputy for production to tell him the bad news. The deputy returns to his room and calls the workers who were directly related to the problem. Since these workers were unaware that the inspector was checking their products, they immediately find themselves in a situation of confrontation.

In a company operating in accordance with “theory Y”, the controller from the Quality Control Department first of all notifies the employees themselves about the problem found, who immediately begin to solve it. As in the first case, the controller reports to superiors, but by the time his report reaches the top rung of the hierarchy, the problem is solved. At the same time, employees understand that management is not going to punish them or spy on them, and they appreciate this honest approach.

As a result, an atmosphere of mutual respect, not suspicion, is strengthened.

“Theory Y” in practice

The director of one high school turned out to be an exceptionally talented leader. Students at this school consistently achieve excellent results on standardized tests, and their parents maintain good relationships with teachers. Not surprisingly, an inspector from the Department of Education decides to use the director's talents in an administrative position in the school district. After interviewing a dozen candidates, the district council makes a recommendation to this director.

The director is offered a significant increase in salary and a solid position. The only problem is that he doesn't want to switch to new job. He enjoys being a school principal and watching teenagers grow up, acquire knowledge and communication skills. All subordinates are devoted to him and are ready for a lot for the sake of their boss. The director expresses his disagreement with the inspector from the ministry, but he does not want to give in. He believes that the district will only benefit from this transition, and the director himself will be pleased with his decision as soon as he gets used to his new role.

Two years later, the inspector will still be satisfied with the work of the ex-director, but the latter will feel unhappy and dream of returning to his old school. This is an example of the worst manifestation of “theory X”: for the sake of the common good, a decision is made unilaterally that does not take into account the interests of a particular person. The director in this situation could not refuse a new position without jeopardizing his career prospects.

In turn, the director would probably understand that it is better to take the chance to enrich the experience and agree than to accept the offer with a grudge in his heart. “Theory Y” suggests that even if the leader is forced to resort to coercion for the common good, a mutually acceptable solution must still be found.

“Theory Y” and power

"Theory Y" can be applied even in such an organization as the army, where, it would seem, "theory X" should reign supreme. The military is obliged to unquestioningly carry out the orders of their commanders. An officer who sends soldiers into battle does not worry about whether participation in this battle contributes to their personal growth. American General George Patton, for example, would simply laugh at the notion that in war one must take into account the wishes and needs of soldiers.

However, giving orders and managing are two different things. The officer understands that the battle will be lost if his soldiers do not make every effort to complete the combat mission. This means that he does not control the soldiers, but rather depends on them. General Patton also depended on his subordinates to relay his orders down the chain. Army commanders, like the leaders of ordinary companies, can no more control their people than the weather. They must have complete trust in their subordinates, but still give orders. Trust and command are not mutually exclusive.

Under Theory Y, leaders not only can but must act decisively, for they are ultimately responsible for solving the problems they face. When a critical situation arises, subordinates will wait for instructions from them on what actions to take. This does not mean that “Theory Y” becomes irrelevant during a crisis. Even in a critical situation, the leader must treat people politely and impartially, without questioning their motives. Nevertheless, he must act firmly and, if necessary, even fire employees - especially those whose mentality corresponds to "Theory X".

Appearance and reality

Tough, authoritarian leaders who seem to lack even basic civility often have dedicated and motivated subordinates. If a certain department head has a habit of yelling at subordinates, using foul language and threatening them with disciplinary action, you might think that this is a leadership style. Nevertheless, the subordinates of this chief work no worse, and sometimes even better than the employees of other departments, and at the same time they give the appearance of professionally successful people who are satisfied with their work.

The fact is that this outwardly rude boss is sincerely interested in the life of his employees. He is not indifferent to their family problems, he is always ready to help people who are in trouble. difficult situation, and occasionally invites employees to lunch to show how much he appreciates them. This boss stubbornly defends the interests of subordinates in conflicts with higher authorities and is even ready to sacrifice his position for them. Employees who know they can rely on their bosses, believe in their own abilities and are ready to work with high efficiency.

What is morality? Morality is the rules of morality, as well as morality itself. This is a special form of social consciousness and a type of social (moral) relations, including in the sphere of state-service relations. In principle, morality, morality, ethics are concepts of the same order, identical.

Everywhere and every day a person enters into a complex system of connections and relationships with other people. At the same time, he is guided by certain principles, norms of behavior. This is a moral practice that arose from the objective need to regulate relationships in human society.

The requirements of morality are fulfilled by people voluntarily by virtue of personal conviction and understanding of their social utility. The internal guarantor of morality is the conscience of a person, the external one is public opinion. The law as a guarantor of execution has the force of the state, a measure of state coercion;

Features and characteristic features morals are:

The universality of its functioning;

Reliance on traditions, habits;

Reliance on public opinion;

Subjective-personal character;

The imperative role that determines its special significance in social relations.

The moral rules and norms associated with public service are in close unity with the morality of the whole society. Attempts to neglect this connection end either in the substitution of professional moral requirements for non-moral attitudes or in abstract declarations.

Practice public service testifies that the official behavior of civil servants should be based on sound moral principles.

The moral principles of public service are understood as a set of norms that express the requirements of the state and society to the moral essence of an employee, to the nature of his relationship with the state in whose service he is, with the civil society he serves, ensuring the interaction of the state and its citizens in protecting them. rights, freedoms and legitimate interests.

This is a system of common values and rules governing the relationship of civil servants among themselves in the course of their joint professional activities in order to create an appropriate moral and psychological climate in the team and increase the efficiency of the civil service.

Science and practice show that the following principles are the general moral principles of official activity of civil servants.

The principle of serving the state and society, requiring disinterested and impeccable service for the benefit of the state and civil society.

The principle of legality. This is the most important ethical principle that obliges officials, all civil servants to strictly comply with the letter and spirit of the laws, including those on public service and personnel activities. In any legal system, all legal norms have their own moral meaning, each legal act has its own moral value. It is important that in the law law and morality correspond to each other.

This principle requires the supremacy of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, federal laws over other legal acts, regulations and instructions. For officials, it should become a rule that non-fulfillment, violation of the law is not only illegal, but also deeply immoral. Unfortunately, we still have a low level of legal culture of civil servants, legal nihilism and a skeptical attitude towards law are very common. This results in legal inconsistency and weakness of state power, double standards in law enforcement practice, irresponsibility and impunity, legal illiteracy of a number of employees.

The principle of humanism, which prescribes to recognize, observe and protect the rights and freedoms of man and citizen. This principle requires the official to respect each person, to recognize the sovereignty of the individual and its dignity, to be polite, tactful, tolerant. Moreover, this should be manifested not only externally, but should become an internal imperative of an official. This principle shows that the official exists and acts for the person, and not the person for the official.

The principle of responsibility, which obliges civil servants to bear not only legal, but also moral responsibility for the managerial and personnel decisions made. Such an approach is not in the tradition of the Russian mentality. But it must be used, adopted, so that officials feel moral responsibility for their official behavior and activities.

The principle of justice, which requires the reasonable use of power, the protection of the rights and legitimate interests of citizens. Satisfying the need for justice of the authorities is the most important of the moral expectations of society. Any injustice committed by an official causes moral damage to the authority of the authorities. This principle requires a careful and fair approach when appointing employees to a new position, taking into account all its merits and merits.

The principle of loyalty, which means the conscious, voluntary observance by employees of the rules, norms, and regulations established by the state, its individual structures, of their official behavior. It implies loyalty to the public service, respect and correctness in relation to state and public institutions. He demands that a civil servant not harm the image of the state, in every possible way contribute to strengthening its authority.

In accordance with this principle, an official is obliged to show loyalty to: the state, the political system; the political majority in power (the ruling group); to all branches of government; to state institutions (army, police, ministries, departments, etc.); to society, population; to other government officials.

The principle of political neutrality, which requires that the public service and personnel activities be outside politics, outside the direct struggle for power. The manifestation of political and ideological predilections, orientation to any political groupings in the public service system are inappropriate and harmful. At the same time, public-service relations cannot but be of a political nature, since the public service is an institution of the state.

And everything connected with the state and state power is a political phenomenon. The issue is the degree of politicization of the civil service. An indicator of politicization can be considered the level of involvement of the apparatus and individual employees in politics. Therefore, it is impossible to violate the measure of admissibility of the politicization of the state apparatus. But what is this measure?

The principle of honesty and incorruptibility, requiring a categorical rejection of such phenomena as corruption and bureaucracy. The vast majority of citizens (up to 78%) and scientists-experts (up to 76%) pay attention to the corruption and intensive bureaucratization of the state apparatus.

Based on reading the book The Human Side of Enterprise

McGraw-Hill, 2005

Douglas McGregor was a great leader. Competent, witty, and insightful, he was highly respected by his subordinates and believed that people were naturally enthusiastic, responsible, and moral. He believed this so strongly that in 1960 he wrote a book that forever changed management theory, which at the time was based on the notion that people were naturally lazy and only worked when they were forced to. McGregor died in 1964, having made a significant contribution to the theory and practice of management, and his creative legacy will remain the subject of research for a long time to come. Even half a century after its publication, journalists and scientists refer to this regularly republished book! If you manage people, but still haven't read McGregor's book, you should hurry up.

"Theory X"

2. She's too abstract. "Theory X" does not take into account the political, social and economic conditions of a single company.

"Theory X" takes a pessimistic view of human nature. According to her, the relationship between leaders and subordinates is based on mutual hostility. Managers who follow this theory believe that employees are not capable of thinking and acting independently. For this reason, such managers, for the common good of the company, tend to carefully control the activities of their subordinates, assuming that people are not willing to voluntarily take responsibility, since they are only interested in salary. It seems to them that subordinates do not see the big picture of affairs or do not care about the success of the company as a whole. In other words, “Theory X” leaders believe that subordinates work only when someone is constantly watching them.

“Theory X” is based on three premises:

3. People try to avoid responsibility. All they want from life is a quiet job with a regular salary.

What is the fallacy of "Theory X"

In order for employees not to be afraid to take risks and more actively put forward innovative proposals, they must first of all feel safe. In other words, they just want to be respected, praised and appreciated. Many people feel the need to feel part of a team in order to be proud of what they have achieved with others. Yet executives who believe in “Theory X” believe that any grouping of employees is a threat, as it can hinder the success of the company. Therefore, instead of encouraging collective interaction, such leaders in every possible way try to sow enmity between employees.

“Theory Y”

If "theory X" is wrong, what is its alternative? “Theory Y” offers a completely different approach to managing people: bosses should respect subordinates and give them the opportunity to act independently in order to awaken in them the desire to follow moral principles and observe discipline. According to “Theory Y”, if the staff does not show interest in the work and does not follow orders, then the fault should not be the employees, but poor management. “Theory Y” comes from the following postulates:

People don't have an innate dislike for work. Under certain conditions, employees enjoy what they do.

Employees do not have to be kept in fear. Properly motivated employees will work without prodding and make active efforts to meet the challenges facing the company.

The feeling of success gives people pleasure. Achieved success builds self-confidence, and as a result, employees are even more committed to achieving their goals.

People want to do responsible work. It is not true that man is by nature lazy and irresponsible. In fact, he, on the contrary, is looking for any opportunity to do responsible work.

Human beings are naturally endowed with the ability to be creative. Most people are capable of creative problem solving.

People are smart and smart. Leaders often greatly underestimate the intellectual abilities of their subordinates.

"Theory X" argues that the internal policy of the company should be determined by its management, without consulting the staff about anything. According to Theory Y, management should take into account both the needs of the company as a whole and the needs of its employees, who, in turn, would like to benefit their organization.

Differences between the two theories

In companies whose management is based on “Theory X”, formal hierarchy is important. Consider the example of quality control work. When an inspector from the QCD, checking the products of one of the departments, discovers a problem, he reports it to his immediate supervisor. The latter passes this information to the deputy head of the department, who notifies the head of the department, and he calls the deputy for production to tell him the bad news. The deputy returns to his room and calls the workers who were directly related to the problem. Since these workers were unaware that the inspector was checking their products, they immediately find themselves in a situation of confrontation.

As a result, an atmosphere of mutual respect, not suspicion, is strengthened.

“Theory Y” in practice

The director is offered a significant increase in salary and a solid position. The only problem is that he doesn't want to move to a new job. He enjoys being a school principal and watching teenagers grow up, acquire knowledge and communication skills. All subordinates are devoted to him and are ready for a lot for the sake of their boss. The director expresses his disagreement with the inspector from the ministry, but he does not want to give in. He believes that the district will only benefit from this transition, and the director himself will be pleased with his decision as soon as he gets used to his new role.

Two years later, the inspector will still be satisfied with the work of the ex-principal, but the latter will feel unhappy and dream of returning to his old school. This is an example of the worst manifestation of “theory X”: for the sake of the common good, a decision is made unilaterally that does not take into account the interests of a particular person. The director in this situation could not refuse a new position without jeopardizing his career prospects.

If a school district were run according to Theory Y, then the school principal and the inspector from the ministry would openly discuss their needs with each other. The Inspector would ask the Director to take into account the importance of the proposed position and would offer him his help and support during the initial period. In addition, he would tell the director how he could use the new opportunities to enrich his experience and develop managerial skills. In turn, the director would probably understand that it is better to take the chance to enrich the experience and agree than to accept the offer with a grudge in his heart. “Theory Y” suggests that even if the leader is forced to resort to coercion for the common good, a mutually acceptable solution must still be found.

“Theory Y” and power

Appearance and reality

illustration of “Theory X”. Nevertheless, the subordinates of this chief work no worse, and sometimes even better than the employees of other departments, and at the same time they give the appearance of professionally successful people who are satisfied with their work.

The fact is that this outwardly rude boss is sincerely interested in the life of his employees. He is not indifferent to their family problems, he is always ready to help people who find themselves in a difficult situation, and from time to time invites employees to dinner to show how much he appreciates them. This boss stubbornly defends the interests of subordinates in conflicts with higher authorities and is even ready to sacrifice his position for them. Employees who know they can rely on their bosses, believe in their own abilities and are ready to work with high efficiency.

about the author
Douglas McGregor - ex-president Antioch College, one of the founders of the Sloan School of Management at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.