Current managing organizations in humanistic perspectives

【Abstract】This report focus on analysing management perspectives over time， especially critically examine humanistic perspective in current managing organisation.

【Key words】humanistic perspective; McGregor; theory X and theory Y

【作者簡介】liujiajia（1988.12-），female，Beihai Vocational College，lecturer，Master degree，Research direction：Human resource management。

In modern organizations， a successful management could lead desirable achievement. Many management practices in the past 100 years have proved that good management could benefits organizations. The definitions of humanistic perspective will be described. In addition， humanistic perspective will be discussed via McGregor theory X and theory Y.Appropriate motivation of employees approaches will also be expressed in this report.

Douglas McGregor firstly proposed two theories and simple called the theories Theory X and Theory Y in his book named “The human side of enterprise”. McGregor （1960） believed that theory X assumption is concerning the characteristic of employee who is lazy and dislikes to work and most of them are lack of ambition and responsibility， they resist change and do not care about organizational goals. On the other hand， theory Y assumption considers the characteristic of managers， who think employees have motivation to seek responsibility to work. Moreover， most of the employees can deal with the problems in any circumstance because of their ingenuity and creativity. Theory X and theory Y act as the standard of human relations movement and theory Y appeared as one of the indication relationship management principle of the second half of the 20th century （Carson， 2005）.

These theories have significant impact on current management. For current managers， they should tend to be theory Y managers which believe his staff can efficiently and independently. Sorensen and Minahan （2011） pointed out McGregor theories as an important element to “increased task complexities， rapidly changing environments and increased technological sophistication” are consequent on new organizational forms which are extraordinary consistent with theory Y. McGregor believed that managers could coordinate to change employees` assumptions in order to motivate and control themselves （Wren， 1987）. An ideal method for managers to motivate employees is impossible， and managers could implicate theory Y management to organizations. Usage of Theory Y management can enhance employees performance. Managers intend to make themselves in a positive attitude to motivate employees and influence employees behaviors by self-actualization. Some employees may have incorrect viewpoints such as putting their efforts toward monetary rewards not the organizational goals. The factors of two-factor theory from Fredrick Herzberg like achievement， recognition for accomplishment， responsibility and personal growth are distinctly connected with the concept of Theory Y （Story et al.， 2009）. Theory Y Managers remove negative emotions and increase employees` satisfaction and lead to positive emotion. Employees should recognize that their obligation is to achieve organizational goals and make organizations operated effectively as long as employees realize their responsibility， they can start to engaged into work and control their emotions. Present organizations motivate employees by using Theory Y management strategy， and lots of organizations have been changed to this management style and successful achieved the goals by now.

References：

[1]Carson， C. M. （2005）. A historical view of Douglas McGregors theory Y. Management decision， 43（3）， 450-460.

[2]Cole， R. E. （2011）. What really happened to Toyota？ MIT Sloan Management Review， 52（4）， 29-35.

[3]McGregor， D. （1960）. The human side of enterprise. New York： McGraw-Hill.

[4]Wren， D. A. （1987）. The evolution of management thought （3rd ed.）. New York： Wiley.

[5]Story， P. A.， Hart， J. W.， Stasson， M. F.， & Mahoney， J. M. （2009）. Using a two-factor theory of achievement motivation to examine performance-based outcomes and self-regulatory processes. Personality and Individual Differences， 46（4）， 391-395.