Theory X Software Project Managers
From the pmStudent Blog
by Josh Nankivel
Ranting and raving about project management and systems engineering.
Recent Posts
The Problem with Project Management
The Problem with Project Management
The Problem with Project Management
LinkedIn Recommendations Are Easy
The Catch-22 of Project Management Certification and Experience
Categories
Agile,
Career Development,
Certification,
Change Management,
Communications Management,
Cost Management,
Documentation,
Earned Value Management,
Education,
Integration and Test,
Kanban,
Leadership,
Lean,
Lessons Learned,
Methodology,
Misc,
Multitasking,
New Project,
Operations,
Planning,
PMP,
Productivity,
Professional Development,
Project Estimation,
Project Leadership,
Quality,
Requirements Management,
Risk Management,
Schedule Management,
Scope Management,
Software,
Systems Thinking,
Tools,
Video,
Work Breakdown Structures (WBS)
Date
I'm going to make a very specific case today.
Let's review the Theory X / Theory Y models of McGregor, knowing full well they are just models. There is no purely Theory X or Theory Y manager.
Theory X
Assumes project team members:
-
are lazy by default
-
will avoid work if they can
-
inherently dislike work
-
will show little ambition without an enticing incentive program
-
will avoid responsibility whenever they can
Assumes project team members need:
-
to be told what to do, given structure
-
to be closely supervised
-
comprehensive systems of controls developed
-
respond best to threat and coercion (carrot and stick)
Results in:
-
blaming people before systems and processes
-
culture of CYA (cover your a$$)
-
hierarchical structure
-
focus on compliance
-
top-down decision making
Theory Y
Assumes project team members:
-
find satisfaction in doing a good job
-
enjoy challenging and meaningful work
-
are self-motivated and responsible
-
are creative problem solvers
Assumes project team members need:
-
to be able to learn new skills
-
to accept responsibility on a regular basis
-
to exercise self-control and self-direction
Results in:
-
evaluating systems for flaws before people
-
flat organizational structure
-
climate of empowerment and trust
-
culture where mistakes are opportunities to learn
-
focus on commitment
-
shared decision making
Knowledge Work, Specifically Software Project Management
My verdict is that software project managers exist out there in numbers who are heavily geared towards the Theory X side of things. And that the more they are, the more their teams succeed in spite of them rather than because of them. And even when they do succeed, it's far below the potential of the team.
Now, what's your verdict?
Posted on: June 03, 2012 09:25 PM |
Permalink
Comments (10)
Please login or join to subscribe to this item
How much a company veers toward Theory X or Theory Y is not usually based on the PM, but on the company culture, which in turn is driven from the executive management, and in large part how far along the PM maturity model they have come along.
I have found that in silo driven org cultures, theory X operates by default, though it is usually functional managers that avoid responsibility and show little ambition unless given enticing incentive. Staff will usually do as much as they can given conflicting priority schedules, allowing projects to success despite Theory X.
The further along a company develops along the PM maturity model the further they move away from X and towards Y.
An individual PM can influence that within that PM's projects and maybe extend to a somewhat limited amount to the org as a whole, depending on how well he can politic the situation, but sooner or later, she/he either has to conform to the org norms or has to find an org that conforms to his norms. There is only so far you can buck culture driven from the top.
Josh Nankivel
Engineering Project Manager| Apple
Sioux Falls, Sd, United States
Very interesting Alexander, I wouldn't have thought to look at correlating this with the PM maturity model.
I see what you mean, but I've also worked in organizations that had a decent mixture of both in their culture, so it was more of a moderate middle-ground. Here, the individual PM's behavior has a big impact.
Brad Egeland
Business Solution Designer| Bradegeland.com
Las Vegas, Nv, United States
My experience, thankfully, has been with the Theory Y type of team members. Once in a while there is a rogue developer thrown into the mix that must be reined in. However, rarely have I encountered the lazy and unmotivated type of PM resources described in Theory X.
Josh Nankivel
Engineering Project Manager| Apple
Sioux Falls, Sd, United States
Thanks Brad. I think perception means a great deal too. A theory X mindset from a manager will drive a specific kind of behavior from the team. The same goes for theory Y. Reminds me of the studies where they set expectations for school kids and showed that expectations of the teachers was a direct causal link to performance.
Naomi Caietti
Senior Project Manager | ePMO | Higher Education | Healthcare & IT| Linkedin.com/In/NaomiCaietti
Pretty strong verdict; I think there are lots of factors to consider. Certainly, I strongly agree with Alexander and have experienced most of the Theory Y but I've seen a few instances of Theory X. The leadership style, ethics, PM maturity, practitioner, credentialed and many times the culture will dictate the type of PM. Credentialed PMs should be adhering to PMI's code of ethics or risk losing their credential. As more practitioners acquire their credentials their professional reputation will follow them and their professional conduct will be on the line to adhere to the code of ethics.
Furthermore, many organizations are developing core values to further institute the manner in which you conduct yourself while are work with your coworkers and with your customers.
Today, organizations are getting more savvy to instill core values and train their PMs and staff in Project Management; it's just good business.
Josh Nankivel
Engineering Project Manager| Apple
Sioux Falls, Sd, United States
Thanks Naomi. I will say though, the differences I've described are not seen as ethics issues in most case.
PMI's code of ethics certainly doesn't say that hierarchy is bad, focus on compliance is bad, etc. (I may be incorrect, but I don't think so)
Theory X certainly doesn't equate to abuse, yelling, name-calling, etc. - that's a step beyond anything covered by these management models. Those things definitely would violate PMI's code of ethics.
Naomi Caietti
Senior Project Manager | ePMO | Higher Education | Healthcare & IT| Linkedin.com/In/NaomiCaietti
Josh:
Take a peek at PMI''s Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct. All credentialed PMs should do this periodically anyway.
Let''s consider the following: based on assumptions a PM used a style like Theory X to meet an assumed need and through their actions interfacing with their team they created an impact. I''ll assert the actions used to create the impact may create situations where they could not be in alignment with one or more of the areas of ethics and conduct.
It''s okay if we disagree; clearly the moral here is Theory X is muda- it adds no value for PMs, organizations and teams. :)
Wayne Mack
Retired| Retired
South Riding, Va, United States
I would argue that the real world is more complex than the model given and that an effective manager will need to draw from both sides.
There is not really a conflict in saying that "project team members: find satisfaction in doing a good job, enjoy challenging and meaningful work, are self-motivated and responsible, are creative problem solvers" and also recognizing that sometimes "project team members need: to be told what to do, given structure, to be closely supervised". Given an inexperienced team or team members (at least in the context of the project), the manager would be remiss if he did not provide structure and close oversite. It would be abandonment to sit back and say "You just figure it all out yourselves." On the other hand, given a project with which the team or team members are quite familiar, the manager can manage with a very light touch. Given various project characteristics including risk and business need, the manager may be able to allow the project team to investigate and go down blind alleys or the manager may need to keep the team on a very tight leash. I would also note that I deliberately used the phrase "team or team members", because not all team members may be at the same level and different management approaches may be appropriate for different team members.
The manager needs to be flexible in his management approach and balance the needs of the project, team, and team members. The levels of freedom and oversight will need to vary depending on many circumstances.
Josh Nankivel
Engineering Project Manager| Apple
Sioux Falls, Sd, United States
That's a great point Wayne. These are just models.
And there are specific staff members where your management style should adapt to fit the situation. I'm a big proponent of situational management styles. The Theory X, Y, W, Z stuff is really just helpful as a model, and also perhaps as a bucket for what your general tendencies are.
And there are pieces of each that may be required in different circumstances. But in general, my feeling is that more theory Y and less theory X is a good thing, primarily because the assumptions made by theory X are false when applied to most people.
Friends,
I agree about the Theory X and Y for Project Managers and also agree on the point mentioned above by my dear friend, that it also depends on the organization culture. There are also other factors that drives PM's to go for Theory X instead of Y; in fact he/she may be shown excellent performance earlier and earned respect from project team and management.
So, to conclude, my view is that Project Manager acts according to the factors affecting him and in turn drives the project and project team to success. You can make X ---> Y ; if outside factors 'push' him/ her from 'Good' to 'Great' and this will multiply throughout the project team.
Please Login/Register to leave a comment.
|
"Only two things are infinite, the Universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."
- Albert Einstein
|
