The following management theories (and many others) are used by large and wealthy companies to assess, select and improve the behavior and performance of their human resources - McGregor, Maslow, Myers Briggs, Belbin, Hertzberg, McCelland, Benziger, DISC.
The dictionary beside me defines ‘Behavior’ as ‘one’s manner of behavior or acting’ and “the action or reaction of a material under given circumstances”. Also ‘Motive’ is defined as “something that causes a person to act, prompting to act” and ‘Motivate’ – “to provide with a motive”
In order to understand human behavior it seems that we have to get a grip on motivation. What causes us to act or gives us the motive to act seems to vary between individuals. Is it a conscious or subconscious act? Is it a base need or a higher order need? Is it an instinct developed by nature or by nurture?
Many management theories have tried to divide the ‘known’ or relevant world up into groupings in order to provide a better educated guess of a subject’s likely actions under given circumstances. These theories often go further in identifying strengths and weaknesses of an individual’s personality or behaviour and provide actions to improve performance in the weak areas.
For example in 1960 Douglas McGregor divided the management world into two groups – famously, Theory ‘X’ and Theory ‘Y’ depending on their management style.
Maurice Belbin in the UK divided the working world into 9 work styles (Shaper, Implementer, Completer Finisher, Coordinator, Team worker, Resource Investigator, Plant, Monitor Evaluator and Specialist.). MTR-I suggested that it was only 8 roles (Innovator, Scientist, Crusader, Sculptor, Explorer, Curator, Coach, and Conductor). Perhaps the most widely used system, DISC, divided the world into 4 main groupings (Steadiness, Compliance, Influence and Dominance), which are further sub divided into 10 roles (Participator, Developer, Specialist, Doer, Planner, Assurer, Communicator, Influencer, Stimulator and, Changer). Perhaps the most well known is the MBTI (Myers Briggs Type Indicator) which stays closer to classical Jungian psychology group names (Thinking, Introversion, Feeling, Sensing, and Intuition).
Finally Katherine Benziger in Chicago uses a very modern notation based on the predominant part of the brain (basal right, basal left, front right, front left). A further breakdown is possible based on the findings to double lefts, double rights, double basals, triple-brain double right (right basal leads) with frontal lefts and eventually to whole-brained. (These are pretty exceptional people, mostly women!).
In the early part of the last century in the USA, Abraham Maslow and Frederick Hertzberg postulated differing views on motivation based on a common man approach. Later David McCelland divided the world in three groups based on their ‘motivation needs’ which he saw as a need for power, achievement or affiliation (which he names N-Pow, N-Ach and N- Aff for short)
Perhaps these groups are trying to do too much – after all the world is now 6 billion people and this year, 2006 will be the first time that more than half the people live in cities. If we assume that 40% of the people in cities and 20% of the rest work in the workplace environment then you can see that this is an impossibly big task of dividing up almost 2 billion people with one simple theory.
Hertzberg did his work in the 1960’s on a group of 200 engineers and accountants (presumably male) from Pittsburg, USA. Today this would be invalid as a representative sample for the ‘workplace environment’. Most of the theories, with the exception of Benziger seem to be based on observation science and many rely on the truthful answers to interview questions (and the possibility of ‘falsifying type’). And while the database of the interviewee’s characteristics continues to build the knowledge perhaps at times it just reinforces a myth.
Nobody would doubt that genetic traits like blue eyes and curly hair are inherited. Many of the genes for specific traits have been identified and located. We now need to look to identify genes that have been linked to certain behaviors and understand the effects they have particularly on brain chemistry.
Hopefully at the end of this we will have a better, more scientific understanding of human behavior and not have to rely on dividing a world of 2 billion people into 2 or 4 or 8 or 10 or whatever is the current favorite number.
It will mean a diversion into Dopamine (motivation and reward), Cortisol (stress), Serotonin (aggressiveness), which I hope to have posted by Friday.
To be honest as I was typing the groupings above the words from the song ‘gypsy’s, tramps and thieves’ kept playing in my mind. We will need a group classification but for the moment lets just stick with the notion that we are all unique until proven otherwise by science.
The dictionary beside me defines ‘Behavior’ as ‘one’s manner of behavior or acting’ and “the action or reaction of a material under given circumstances”. Also ‘Motive’ is defined as “something that causes a person to act, prompting to act” and ‘Motivate’ – “to provide with a motive”
In order to understand human behavior it seems that we have to get a grip on motivation. What causes us to act or gives us the motive to act seems to vary between individuals. Is it a conscious or subconscious act? Is it a base need or a higher order need? Is it an instinct developed by nature or by nurture?
Many management theories have tried to divide the ‘known’ or relevant world up into groupings in order to provide a better educated guess of a subject’s likely actions under given circumstances. These theories often go further in identifying strengths and weaknesses of an individual’s personality or behaviour and provide actions to improve performance in the weak areas.
For example in 1960 Douglas McGregor divided the management world into two groups – famously, Theory ‘X’ and Theory ‘Y’ depending on their management style.
Maurice Belbin in the UK divided the working world into 9 work styles (Shaper, Implementer, Completer Finisher, Coordinator, Team worker, Resource Investigator, Plant, Monitor Evaluator and Specialist.). MTR-I suggested that it was only 8 roles (Innovator, Scientist, Crusader, Sculptor, Explorer, Curator, Coach, and Conductor). Perhaps the most widely used system, DISC, divided the world into 4 main groupings (Steadiness, Compliance, Influence and Dominance), which are further sub divided into 10 roles (Participator, Developer, Specialist, Doer, Planner, Assurer, Communicator, Influencer, Stimulator and, Changer). Perhaps the most well known is the MBTI (Myers Briggs Type Indicator) which stays closer to classical Jungian psychology group names (Thinking, Introversion, Feeling, Sensing, and Intuition).
Finally Katherine Benziger in Chicago uses a very modern notation based on the predominant part of the brain (basal right, basal left, front right, front left). A further breakdown is possible based on the findings to double lefts, double rights, double basals, triple-brain double right (right basal leads) with frontal lefts and eventually to whole-brained. (These are pretty exceptional people, mostly women!).
In the early part of the last century in the USA, Abraham Maslow and Frederick Hertzberg postulated differing views on motivation based on a common man approach. Later David McCelland divided the world in three groups based on their ‘motivation needs’ which he saw as a need for power, achievement or affiliation (which he names N-Pow, N-Ach and N- Aff for short)
Perhaps these groups are trying to do too much – after all the world is now 6 billion people and this year, 2006 will be the first time that more than half the people live in cities. If we assume that 40% of the people in cities and 20% of the rest work in the workplace environment then you can see that this is an impossibly big task of dividing up almost 2 billion people with one simple theory.
Hertzberg did his work in the 1960’s on a group of 200 engineers and accountants (presumably male) from Pittsburg, USA. Today this would be invalid as a representative sample for the ‘workplace environment’. Most of the theories, with the exception of Benziger seem to be based on observation science and many rely on the truthful answers to interview questions (and the possibility of ‘falsifying type’). And while the database of the interviewee’s characteristics continues to build the knowledge perhaps at times it just reinforces a myth.
Nobody would doubt that genetic traits like blue eyes and curly hair are inherited. Many of the genes for specific traits have been identified and located. We now need to look to identify genes that have been linked to certain behaviors and understand the effects they have particularly on brain chemistry.
Hopefully at the end of this we will have a better, more scientific understanding of human behavior and not have to rely on dividing a world of 2 billion people into 2 or 4 or 8 or 10 or whatever is the current favorite number.
It will mean a diversion into Dopamine (motivation and reward), Cortisol (stress), Serotonin (aggressiveness), which I hope to have posted by Friday.
To be honest as I was typing the groupings above the words from the song ‘gypsy’s, tramps and thieves’ kept playing in my mind. We will need a group classification but for the moment lets just stick with the notion that we are all unique until proven otherwise by science.
No comments:
Post a Comment