Theory X and Theory Y When working with people, regardless of the organization, one must be cognizant of the way individuals are motivated. Motivation, in fact, is one of the basic driving forces that allow individuals to work, change, and even actualize their internal and external goals. Much of the background on motivation is based on the work of Maslow, not only surrounding human needs, but the manner in which those needs are individualized and met within the particular cultural context of the contemporary world. In this, for most developed countries, the context is the workplace. Individuals spend more time at work and often feel that the workplace is really their culture -- regardless of their own uniqueness. Within this culture, the idea of incentive theory supposed that a tangible or intangible reward has the potential for allowing the individual to be motivated, and thus for the organization to receive a recurring benefit. This is done at its most basic level by associating positive returns for certain types of performance. Stimuli -- money, intellectual satisfaction, power, authority, etc. -- all drive these individuals. Within the workplace, they individual knows that the manager is the reinforce of the behavior and if they perform X they will receive the Y reward that motivates them the most. The reinforcer, however, also believes that rewarding this behavior will have dual outcomes: habit for the employee and greater motivation for colleagues and co-workers. This allows for both intrinsic (internal) and extrinsic (external) motivations to occur simultaneously. However, one basic premise, known as the equity theory, holds that the perception of unfairness is quite a powerful motivating force within the workplace. This complicates ways in which managers interact with employees to find ways (salary, praise, education, experience, etc.) to allow for the greatest productivity (Montana and Chanrov, 2008).

Theory X and Theory Y- Theory X and Theory Y are ways that the perceptions managers tend to have about employees, not the way they actually behave. Theory X, usually counterproductive, believes that employees are inherently lazy...

Theory Y assumes employees are ambitious and self-motivated. More than likely, these are both true and different ends of the same linear continuum. The combination is more like a combination of Maslow's "Hierarchy of Needs" and Herzberg's "Two-Factor Theory." It essentially goes beyond drive and says that humans have needs that must be satisfied; typically layered from survival issues upward. Once the bottom layers have been fulfilled (e.g. food, shelter, safety), then self-esteem, recognition, achievement and self-actualization, which are all workplace goals, become even more important. These workplace needs are an intrinsic/extrinsic motivational technique that results in job satisfaction, but if absent, result not in dissatisfaction, but no satisfaction. Thus, there are motivators (challenges, responsibility and recognition) and hygiene factors (salary, fringe benefits, status) that may result in demotivation. The key for the manager then is to identify the true motivational needs and provide an appropriate environment for their actualization. This, of course, assumes that it is possible to categorize individuals into really two major templates, and that there is enough commonality to induce theoretical structure into the group (Fisher, 2000).
There is a difference, however, between X (autocratic) and Y (democratic). These are managerial styles rather than assumptions. X managers are not necessarily autocratic, mean, or harsh, they simply believe that people are naturally unmotivated and need to be managed more directly. Theory Y managers believe that people want to achieve and actualize; consequently, they hold people accountable for their actions and deliverables. We can more easily understand this by comparing the two basic paradigms:

X Model

Y Model

Commentary

Most people are lazy, that is, they take the easier way out of a situation.

Most people like to work, like to find challenges, and often opt for the path toward actualization.

This may, in fact, be highly dependent upon the job or task, and the person's…