If managers are at the fourth level and the managed are at the second level the situation is worse. Leaders believe the followers should participate in decisions and the follower believes he should be told. The manager waits for participation and the managed wait for direction. In this hopeless combination of dissimilar incongruent value systems the organization is stifled. It dies.

Today many managers, too many of them, for reasons that cannot now be detailed, tend to remain somewhere in the region of third and fourth level existence while many of the managed are beginning to move through and beyond the level of existence of their managers. The managed are beginning to behave in the manner described by McGregor’s Theory Y but many of their bosses cannot accept the insights necessary to lift themselves to the level of Responsive or Integrative management. On the one hand, the fixated third level manager cannot overcome the fear of loss of his power and the fourth level manager’s energy is consumed in the fear of being disliked. The former are increasing Directive Managerial controls and the latter are regressing thereto. These managers who blame their problems on labor that too powerful, on government that intervenes, on foreigners that compete, or on unreasoning workers whose demands are ridiculous might better ask: "How do my values clash with the values of those whom I manage?"

Having illustrated the hypotheses, I hope, that managerial controls must be congruent with the values of the managed, let me give thought, within this theory, to the problems of creative innovation versus the conservation of traditional values, to the resolution of value conflicts, to revolutionary versus evolutionary transformation of values and to institutional decision processes.

<< back  | 10 |  next >>