However, few would argue that Theory X is an outdated leadership style that does not promote success. According to Kopelman et al. (2008): "At the heart of McGregor's argument is the notion that managers' assumptions/attitudes represent, potentially, self-fulfilling prophecies. The manager who believes that people are inherently lazy and untrustworthy will treat employees in a manner that reflects these attitudes. Employees, sensing that there is little in the job to spur their involvement, will exhibit little interest and motivation. Consequently, and ironically, the manager with low expectations will lament that 'you can't get good help nowadays,' oblivious as to the actual nature of cause and effect. Closing the serf-reinforcing cycle, the manager feels vindicated; that is, his low expectations were warranted. Conversely, the manager who believes that employees are generally trustworthy and desirous of growth will facilitate their achievement." McGregor, in later studies, recognized that his theories were imperfect. In a separate study, he suggested that managers and management theorists stop and ask about the assumptions they are making about people. They must ask questions such as (Maslow, 1999):

Do you believe that people are trustworthy?

Do you believe that people seek responsibility and accountability?

Do you believe that people seek meaning in their work?

Do you believe that people naturally want to learn?

Do you believe that people don't resist change but they resist being changed?

Do you believe people prefer work to being idle?

Theory Y and Theory Z both state that managers have an opportunity to help employees enhance their quality of work life (QWL). However, neither provides strategies for how they can do so. Lawler (McGraw Hill, 2008) suggested...

"Other strategies include enhancing the worker's sense of self-worth and providing opportunities for social relationships to develop within the organization. Job satisfaction is an area of organizational psychology that will continue to be important in the future," according to McGraw Hill.
Many experts believe that Type Z managers are more successful in terms of fostering employee satisfaction, motivation, commitment, and productivity that Type X and Type Y managers. However, other experts argue that Type Z managers do not outperform other types of managers. This paper holds that each management theory has positive and negative elements, although they may be different in practice, as companies vary in many ways.

References

Benson, Gary L. (1983). "How Employee Assumptions Influence Managerial Behavior." Supervisory Management March: 2(7).

Bittel, Lester. (1989). McGraw-Hill Management Course. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Braden, Pamela. (2007). West Virginia University, Division of Business and Economics. Retrieved from the Internet at http://www.wvup.edu/jcc/mgmt410/TheoryZ.pdf.

Daft, R.L. (2004). "Theory Z: Opening the Corporate Door for Participative Management." Academy of Management Executive 18, no. 4: 117-122.

Kopelman, Richard. Prottas, David. Davis, Anne. (2008). Douglas McGregor's Theory X and Y: toward a construct-valid measure. Journal of Managerial Issues: Summer.

Maslow, Abraham (1999). Maslow on Management. New York: McGraw-Hill.

McGraw Hill. (2008). Work Motivation. Retrieved from the Internet at http://www.dushkin.com/connectext/psy/ch09/workmot.mhtml.