Theory X is not dead. It lives on in low-wage industries where workers must follow rules to the letter and in high-wage ones where pay motivates people long after they can feed themselves. It surfaces in the fears of managers that working from home is a golden excuse for people to do nothing. It shows up in the behaviour of employees who phone it in and bosses who bully and berate.
Originating from Douglas McGregor’s groundbreaking work in the mid-20th century, Theory X posits that employees inherently dislike work and need to be coerced and controlled. Despite the advancements in management thinking, Theory X finds a stubborn home in specific industries and organisational cultures.
Sujiv Nair, global CHRO, Re Sustainability, says, “In Indian organisations, for instance, the presence of professional boards may not necessarily translate into a complete departure from Theory X. There persists a mindset among some managers that employees, especially those in the early stages of their careers, need close supervision for effective performance. This perspective is often rooted in the belief that employees, particularly from the younger generations, need guidance and structure in their work.”
“In Indian organisations, for instance, the presence of professional boards may not necessarily translate into a complete departure from Theory X. There persists a mindset among some managers that employees, especially those in the early stages of their careers, need close supervision for effective performance”
Sujiv Nair, global CHRO, Re Sustainability
He opines, “The generational gap further contributes to the prevalence of Theory X, with Baby Boomers and Gen X managers often holding more conventional views on management, emphasising control and supervision. However, as we move down the generational ladder, there is a growing shift towards Theory Y, where empowerment and autonomy are valued.”
Shaleen Manik, CHRO, Transsion India, shares, “Over the past two decades, there have been noticeable changes in management approaches, yet Theory X persists. The extent to which it prevails is often influenced by the nature of the industry and the specific business operations in question.”
He emphasises, “In the manufacturing sector, for instance, where conformity, regulations and precision are paramount, the hierarchical model and Theory X find continued favour. Large, well-established companies with a legacy spanning decades tend to favour a more controlled and hierarchical decision-making process. This inclination towards centralised decision-making is seen as a means to ensure that operations align with the perceived right direction.”
“Large, well-established companies with a legacy spanning decades tend to favour a more controlled and hierarchical decision-making process. This inclination towards centralised decision-making is seen as a means to ensure that operations align with the perceived right direction”
Shaleen Manik, CHRO, Transsion India
In industries where labour is commoditised and workers are seen as interchangeable parts of a larger machine, Theory X tends to find a comfortable home. Strict adherence to rules and regulations becomes paramount, and managers may adopt a controlling approach, assuming that employees lack motivation or responsibility.
While modern management theories emphasise the importance of intrinsic motivation, the reality is that in some high-wage industries, financial incentives still play a significant role. In these cases, the belief in Theory X endures, as managers may perceive that employees are primarily motivated by monetary rewards long after their basic needs are met.
The rise of remote work in recent times has challenged traditional management paradigms. However, Theory X manifests in the apprehensions of some managers, who fear that working from home provides employees with a golden excuse to shirk responsibilities. This fear can result in increased monitoring and control measures, reminiscent of Theory X principles.
Theory X continues to influence management practices in organisations where employees exhibit disengagement and managers resort to autocratic and punitive measures. Instances of employees phoning it in and managers resorting to bullying or berating tactics suggest that the principles of Theory X are alive and well in certain organisational cultures.
What keeps Theory X relevant?
Organisations, like individuals, can be resistant to change. Adopting new management philosophies requires a cultural shift that some organisations find challenging to navigate. Theory X may persist due to ingrained habits, organisational inertia and a reluctance to embrace a more participative and empowering management style.
In some cases, organisations may continue to operate under Theory X simply because they are unaware of alternative management theories or are hesitant to invest in training and development programmes that would introduce new approaches. Ignorance about the benefits of Theory Y may contribute to the perpetuation of Theory X practices.
According to Hrishi Mohan, group CHRO, AXISCADES, it’s crucial to recognise that Theory X isn’t entirely obsolete, especially when organisations face difficult decisions that demand a disciplined approach. “In such instances, the established values and principles may guide tough calls that are necessary for the survival and prosperity of the business,” opines Mohan.
“Rather than painting Theory X in a negative light or elevating Theory Y as the sole ideal, it’s important to appreciate the context in which each theory can be valuable”
Hrishi Mohan, group CHRO, AXISCADES
He further adds, “This acknowledgment underscores the idea that a blend of theories, perhaps a nuanced approach such as ‘X plus Y by two’, may be more practical. In navigating complex situations, an organisation may need to adopt elements from both Theory X and Theory Y, recognising that each theory has its merits and demerits.”
Some organisations prioritise short-term gains over long-term sustainability. In such environments, the immediate results associated with Theory X, such as increased control and productivity, may be favoured over the potential for innovation and employee satisfaction that Theory Y promises.
Mohan believes, “Rather than painting Theory X in a negative light or elevating Theory Y as the sole ideal, it’s important to appreciate the context in which each theory can be valuable. A balanced perspective acknowledges that a certain level of discipline and ownership, often associated with Theory X, can be beneficial, especially in extreme environments.”
Low-wage industries, reliance on financial incentives, remote-work concerns, and entrenched behavioural patterns contribute to the endurance of Theory X. Recognising the limitations of this theory and actively embracing more contemporary management approaches is crucial for organisations aiming to thrive in today’s dynamic and competitive environment.
