Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
appeal to their willingness to accept responsibility. These managers do not abdicate
their responsibility and authority to their employees. They are quick to enter into a dialogue
that will help both the manager and employee arrive at mutually acceptable goals,
and to establish a reward system that is fulfi lling to the employee. Theory Y management
is not an easy style. It requires patience and a great deal of people skills on the part of
managers.
Obviously, there is much appeal to the Theory Y management approach, and McGregor
was a strong proponent of it, especially early in his career. If one fully accepted these appeal-
ing assumptions, there would be little need for time clocks, fi xed working schedules, produc-
tion quotas, and the like. Many organizations have made strong attempts over the past
several decades to move closer to a Theory Y style of management, though there are still
holdovers.
However, it should not be assumed automatically that Theory X management is bad and
Theory Y management is good. It is said that McGregor used the Theory X, Theory Y ter-
minology on purpose, so as not to imply superiority of one style, even though he preferred
the Theory Y approach. In fact, McGregor himself softened his strong support of the Theory
Y position later in his career when he became a university administrator and personally
experienced some of the frustrations associated with applying strong Theory Y management
assumptions. Some employees hold Theory X type assumptions about themselves and so
perhaps prefer to be treated in a manner consistent with this belief. But clearly there is great
merit in the Theory Y approach, and agribusinesses have generally moved in this direction.
Management by objectives
Management by objectives (MBO)
concentrates on results rather than on the process by
which they are achieved. It is a system of management whereby the supervisor and the sub-
ordinate jointly:
1.
Set objectives that both agree are reasonable and in line with corporate goals.
2.
Determine how performance will be measured in each area of major responsibility.
First introduced by Peter Drucker in 1954, but continued to be used broadly, the MBO proc-
ess usually begins with a very broad set of objectives and sense of direction as established
by the board of directors. Top management develops its own objectives, consistent with the
board's framework, and submits them to the board for reaction. Top management then asks
middle management to develop and submit goals that are consistent with overall corporate
goals as interpreted and applied to the middle managers' respective departments. Then, top
management and middle management coordinate these goals through a negotiating process
until an acceptable set of goals and yardstick to measure progress have been established.
Next, middle management works with lower management, and so on down the line until the
process has been repeated throughout the organization.
There are obvious advantages to such a system. First, since it accords individuals a cer-
tain amount of input into their own goals, employees tend to become emotionally committed
to accomplishing whatever they have targeted for themselves. Second, with MBO, the crite-
ria for evaluation become crystal clear and are agreed on by all concerned, which eliminates
many problems later. It is important that objectives be clearly established and clearly meas-
urable in the MBO process. As manager and subordinate meet for evaluation, judging
whether or not objectives have been met should not be subjective.
