Suchergebnisse

<div><p><em>Optimizing human productivity is a challenging process for the organizations and this process involves getting the best performance from employees within the organizational constraints. Even though the performance of human resources in organizations mainly depend on technology and external environment, ways of thinking individually and by teams, and humanistic orientation are important. Various models are used in developing a strategy to improve the people's performance in organizations. Such for example, are theory X, theory Y and theory A. All these in common are based on presumptions about the human behaviour at work. Theory X and Y are opposing each other in predicting human nature. Theory X describes human nature as lazy, dislikes work and avoids, lacks responsibility, seeks security, lack of ambition and therefore should be forced, controlled, threatened or closely supervised to get work. Theory Y believes in the exercise of self-direction and self-control investing faith in individual potential, imagination, creativity and its application to work. Against this is theory A which focuses innate human potential, inherent urge for creativity, self-expression and contribution to the organization as motivators. As such, managers have to transform average employee to real performers using role models and self-exploration. This paper attempts to compare factors affecting organizational performance in all these aforesaid theories. It also details a set of model operational steps in introducing the theory of accountability. It also makes a SWOC analysis of theory A and its application to different types of organizations.</em></p></div>