The Beechmont Crest Online Guide to Management Science
IT’S ALL RELATIVE: THE CONTINGENCY APPROACH AND INTERACTIONALISM
Scientific management, classical organization theory, and Theory X / Theory Y management are each applicable and appropriate in certain contexts. After all, we are all motivated by money (at least, most of us are) as Taylor asserted, and most people tend to work harder when they are respected and treated fairly--as McGregor suggested.
But none of these theories can explain behavior across all organizational situations. The real world--and real people--are too complex to fit neatly within packaged stimulus-response paradigms. In some situations we are more likely to respond to financial rewards. Under other circumstances, we may be more easily motivated by McGregor’s Theory Y techniques. As the equivocators among us often say, “It depends.”
The contingency approach is one way of accounting for this “situational variance.” According to the contingency approach, there is no one “best way” to structure organizations and motivate employees. When applying the contingency approach to organizational situations, one considers not only the subject (employee) and the stimulus (money, a rewarding job, etc.) but additional variables as well. For example, a single employee might be more likely to respond to a lower paying, but more rewarding job situation. A person with a family to support, however, might be willing to tolerate a Tayloristic job if the pay and benefits made the situation worthwhile.
The older management theories have an additional flaw: the assume that the employee is capable of reacting to situations, but not influencing them. The model known as interactionalism accounts for the fact that the interaction between the individual and her environment involves multidirectional channels of influence. The employee doesn’t just react to her job situation, she also has a hand in shaping it. Therefore, the characteristics of the individual as well as the nature of the environment should be taken into account when making predictions about behavior.
Suppose that Amy takes a job for a manager who subscribes to the Theory X (scientific) management philosophy. Amy’s reactions to the manager (persuasion, resistance, etc.) may steer the manager in a Theory Y direction. (Conversely, Amy’s attempts to influence the manager may only reinforce his attitudes.) On the other hand, another employee may respond passively to the manager, which will produce yet another set of outcomes.