Theory Z

In 1981, William Ouchi came up with a method that would combine American and Japanese managing practice together to form Theory Z. In order for him to accomplish this, he had to learn about the Japanese culture. He had to find out why the Japanese quality and productivity were much higher than the American. The people in the US are usually characterize as being soft, lazy people, who feel they are in title to a good life, without earning it. In the 80's US company's quality was so bad, that when a Japanese company ordered in American made car, they had a reassembly plant. Here the company would disassemble those cars and rebuilt them to meet Japanese standards. People in America see business management as a career. The US as a nation has people taking classes to earn a degree in management.(Reich,27)

Japanese have always had a different style of managing than the US. One thing that the Japanese believe in, is lifetime employment. They feel that the company has no right in firing you, unless you do a criminal offense. The only way you are release by the company is when you reach 55, because this is the age were people in Japan are force to retire. When the economy starts doing bad in Japan companies do not start firing people, but rather cut employees hours. In the US though, companies usually tend to use short term employment rather than live time. This explains why people in the US feel so unsecured with their jobs. When a company in the US begins to struggle, they waste no time in laying off people.

Besides job security Japanese company's believe in trust. The Japanese feel you should never give people reason to distrust you. They believe you should always be loyal to everyone in the company and to the people who supply your companies with supply. Unlike US companies who are known to distrust one another. If they feel their supplier is not giving them a good deal, US companies tend to look for somebody who will.

People in Japan feel that a person should not be evaluate or promoted until he has served ten years with the company. During those ten years, they will be taught everything in the company. They believe that if you work for the company, you should know every aspect involved to run it. In Japan it is not strange to see managers working side by side with their employees. This explains why manager in Japan are able to understand their employees problems. Whereas American dislike this method because they believe in rapid feedback and fast promotion. When they feel they are not being treated fair, workers have a tendency of leaving from job to job. Another problem with American manager is that they are not aware of everything in the company.

Another thing that Japan does is that they believe in outsider should not get promoted, that the promotion should come within the company. US companies, though are known to give promotion to people who are inside or even outside the company.

Japanese corporation believe that you should not give your employees a set target. They feel that the employee should know what his objective is, and know what the customer wants. Without having management telling them what to do, the employee begin to rely on each other. Americans on the other hand, believe that in order to operate a business, you must give them what they think is their set objective. Americans feel that in order for them to get motivate, management has to set in objective for them to meet. In Japan they fell that a person should not be given in objective, because they feel the employee should know what his objective should be.

An interesting thing about the Japanese companies is the way they make decisions. When the company has to make any decision, they feel the whole company should be involved. By involving the whole company in the decision you make all the employees feel involved. When the company does come up with a solution, the whole company whether they like it or not will support it. Since this process is so long, it takes management a longer time to come up with a solution. In America, though, the only people who are aloud to make decision concerning the company are top management executives, and not employees. Unlike Japan, who believe you should take your time in making a decision, American's view is the faster the better.

In Japan workers do not like the idea that one individual should be rewarded for their performance. They believe it is not right for them to compete with each other. A person who is sixteen should not be making the same as a person who is twenty. What I mean is even if the sixteen year old is doing a lot more than the twenty year old, it is not right for the younger person to make more than the older one. Americans on the other hand live for praises, and believe if you work harder than somebody else you should make more.

As you can see American and Japanese are no way alike in the way they manage. In the model you are about to see you are going to see the difference between both nations.

Organization Type A American	Organization Type J Japanese
Short-term employment	Lifetime employment
Individual decision making	Collective decision making
Individual responsibility	Collective responsibility
Rapid evaluation & promotion	Slow evaluation & promotion
Explicit control mechanisms	Implicit control mechanisms
Specialized career path	Nonspecialized career path
Segmented concern for employee as an employee	Holistic concern for employee as a person

Ouchi realized the difference between both country and decided to make up Type Z. This type Z is going to be comprise of Type A and Type J. The Type Z is a way Ouchi would like to see American companies ran, but to do this you are going to have to do 12 strategy to make it work. This is the steps companies should take to improve their quality and performance. One is try to understand Type Z and your role. In order for Theory Z to work, you must have skeptics. These people who think this would not work, should not be discourage. When a person is discourage or pushed away, they have a tendency of thinking this will never work. People are going to have to realize that most companies skeptics out number true believer. By involving these skeptics companies begin to form a space of trust. Trust will occur when both parties understands each others view, and know that both are doing it for the good of the company. When a person feels something is not right, by involving them it shows them that neither side is out to hurt the other. Everyone has to realize that with trust comes openness to say what you feel. Another thing people should have is integrity. You should be able to treat people the way you would like to be treated.

The second strategy, the company should be able to audit its philosophy. Here the company will try to figure out a way that suggest how the company should behave to its employee and vice virsa. Companies are going to have to find out were the company "is", not were it should be. First the company is going to have to understand its culture by studying decisions made in the past. They will than have to organize a big meeting were they will asked themselves, what they think worked, failed, and what they thought was inconsistence. When you answer these questions the company begins their philosophy. Management can never be inconsistence in what they feel is desirable. They can not say one thing one day and not in force it the next.

The third strategy is management must be able to define desired philosophy and be able to involve company leaders. Here management can not be intimidated by company leaders and the company leader must be willing to hear everything the manager has to say. Company leaders should not discourage his manager from speaking, because when he is intimidated the manager tends to hold back more information. Company leaders must be willing to go into a discussion with an open mind and be able to trust his managers. When both begin to trust each other they are going to make easy decisions because both will be sharing wanted information.

The fourth strategy is the company will have to create both a structure and incentive in the company. In this, one strategy, he believes in no organization but wants people to recognize a his simple structure, teamwork. You as management want to create a place that whenever somebody is struggling, they can feel assure that his team will pick him up. When the company faces a person who is hogging up the credit you begin to have a lot of unhappy people working together. To stop all this unhappiness management will have to do something they do not want to do, and that is get involved. Companies believe that manager should be honest to its employee and be able to admit their mistakes, and vice virsa.

The fifth strategy is the company will have to develop some interpersonal skills. Here management is going to want everyone to improve on their communication skills. They want to encourage manager to listen more and know when to interrupt. First people are going to have to recognize patterns of interactions when making a decision and solving problems. When somebody try's a quick solution, or drifts off, you should be trained to spot it and stop it. Once you get everyone back on track, management should design in answer that everyone should support. To reach in agreement everyone must be willing to share information, and plans.

The sixth strategy is the company must be able to test themselves and the system. While implementing Theory Z management is going to begin to question their ability to manage. So what managers are going to have to do is to just have confidence in their ability to manage.

The seventh strategy is companies are going to have to stabilize employment. To stabilize employment companies are going to have to challenge every employee, and be able to give him variation of job to do within the company. Here, when a company is doing bad they do not encourage management to lay off people, but rather reduce their hours. This in return gives companies a low turnover rate. Making them waste less time and money in training new people.

The eighth strategy is how to design a system of slow evaluation and promotion. Many young employees are very impatient. If they feel they have no chance for a quick promotion, most employees quit. To end this problem what companies have to do is give them an incentive to stay. So what the companies does is promote these young impatient people before somebody else does. You have to make them think that they are really wanted. This gives them time to learn the business and work with people as a team.

The ninth strategy is how are the companies going to broaden the peoples career paths. Companies are very aware that people who move from job to job are usually harder workers than their top managers. The only problem with this is that when they feel they are going nowhere, they quit. So what the company try's to do is give these employees a variation of jobs within the company. In order to entertain your employee within the organization, you are going to have to let them experience every aspect and every department in the company. When everyone knows what every department is doing, it make it much easier for the company to pass important information within departments.

The tenth strategy is how to get this theory Z working into the lower level. In order for you to implement Theory Z at the lower level you have to start from the top. The change must occur with top management and professional employee, before you try to change lower level employees. People who are lower level employee are not going to follow a method that top management does not follow. With lower level employees you are

going to have to be very patient with them, because they have installed in their heads that management should never be trusted. Employees in the company feel that the companies foreman are sell outs, who work more with management and do not care about employees. Like management, the foreman is going to have to gain its employees trust the same way management did.

The eleventh strategy you have to do is find an area where you can implement employees participation. The way you gain lower level trust is through participation in companies decision, and being able to give them rewards for their accomplishments. The most important thing is give your employees a sense of job security. You also want to encourage your employees to speak. Let them know that the company wants the employees to work as a team and not as an individual.

The final thing is to create a sense of family between everyone. Once you succeed with Theory Z, the way you know if it works is by studying your employees. If your employees are willing to go out with each other, without the companies involvement, than you know that you have succeeded.

With the Theory Z, William Ouchi was able to create a new method for American companies to manage. He was able to emphasize American flavor (e.g. individual responsibility), but with a Japanese emphasize of collective decision making.(Ivancevich,60-61)

Organization Type A American	Organization Type J Japanese	Organization Type Z Modified American
Short-term employment	Lifetime employment	Long-term employment
Individual decision making	Collective decision making	Collective decision making
Individual responsibility	Collective responsibility	Individual responsibility
Rapid evaluation & promotion	Slow evaluation & promotion	Slow evaluation & promotion
Explicit control mechanisms	Implicit control mechanisms	Implicit, informal control with explicit, formalized measures
Specialized career path	Nonspecialized career path	Moderately specialized career paths
Segmented concern for employee as an employee	Holistic concern for employee as a person	Holistic concern, including family

Intercultural Communication

The term "intercultural communication" is often used to refer to the wide range of communication issues that inevitably arise within an organization composed of individuals from a variety of religious, social, ethnic, and technical backgrounds. Each of these individuals brings a unique set of experiences and values to the workplace, many of which can be traced to the culture in which they grew up and now operate. Businesses that are able to facilitate effective communication—both written and verbal—between the members of these various cultural groups will be far better equipped to succeed in the competitive business world than will those organizations that allow internal cultural differences to fester and harden, for such developments inevitably have a negative impact on overall performance.

The importance of effective intercultural communication can hardly be overstated. Indeed, as Trudy Milburn pointed out in Management Review, communication serves not only as an expression of cultural background, but as a shaper of cultural identity. "Cultural identities, like meaning, are socially negotiated, " she wrote. "Ethnic identities, class identities, and professional identities are formed and enacted through the process of communication. What it means to be white, Jewish, or gay is based on a communication process that constructs those identities. It is more than just how one labels oneself, but how one acts in the presence of like and different others, that constructs a sense of identity and membership."

Language—cornerstone of Intercultural Communication

Differences in culture reflect themselves in a variety of ways. For instance, one cultural norm may have a significantly different conception of time than another, or a different idea of what constitutes appropriate body language and personal space when engaged in conversation. But most researchers, employees, and business owners agree that the most important element in effective intercultural communication concerns language. "A great deal of ethnocentrism is centered around language, " said John P. Fernandez in Managing a Diverse Work Force: Regaining the Competitive Edge. "Language issues are becoming a considerable source of conflict and inefficiency in the increasingly diverse work force throughout the world…. No corporation can becompetitive if co-workers avoid, don't listen to, perceive as incompetent, or are intolerant of employees who have problems with the language. In addition, these attitudes could be carried over into their interactions with customers who speak English as a second language, resulting in disastrous effects on customer relations and, thus, the corporate bottom line."

Small business owners, then, should make sure that they do not make assumptions about the abilities of another person—either a vendor, employee, or partner—that are based on ethnocentric assumptions of their own culture's superiority in the realm of communication. "Withhold evaluative statements on foreign communication styles until you recognize that different cultures use different communication methods, "counseled Herta A. Murphy and Herbert W. Hildebrandt in Effective Business Communications.

Often overlooked in discussion of intercultural communication are the sometimes significant cultural differences that exist concerning the practice of listening. Tips about establishing culturally sensitive verbal and written communication practices within an organization are plentiful, but in many cases, relatively short shrift is given to cultural differences in listening, the flip side of the communication coin. "Codes of conduct that specify how listening should be demonstrated are based upon certain cultural assumptions about what counts as listening, " said Milburn. But while the prevailing norms of communication in American business may call for the listener to be quiet and offer body language (steady eye contact, for instance) intended to assure the speaker that his or her words are being heeded, many cultures have different standards that may strike the uninitiated as rude or disorienting. "A person who communicates by leaning forward and getting close may be very threatening to someone who values personal space, " pointed out Oregon Business's Megan Monson. "And that person could be perceived as hostile and unfriendly, simply because of poor eye contact." The key, say analysts, is to make certain that your organization recognizes that cultural differences abound in listening as well as speaking practices, and to establish intercultural communication practices accordingly.

Diversity/Intercultural Communication Policies

In recent years, many companies of various shapes, sizes, and industry sectors have embraced programs designed to celebrate diversity and encourage communication between individuals and groups from different cultural backgrounds. But according to Milburn, "diversity is one of those concepts that is very context-bound. It does not have a singular meaning for everyone. Companies that try to institute diversity programs without understanding the cultural assumptions upon which these programs are based may find it difficult to enact meaningful diversity policies.… Many companies believe that through sharing they can promote diverse cultural values. Yet, how a company defines sharing may actually hinder its diversity initiatives since some cultures have specific rules about sharing. These rules are enacted in everyday communication practices."

Most business owners recognize that their companies are far more likely to be successful if they are able to establish effective systems of intercultural communication between employees of different religious, social, and ethnic backgrounds. But profound differences in communication styles can also be found within functional areas of a company as well, and these too need to be addressed to ensure that the organization is able to operate at its highest level of efficiency. For example, employees engaged in technical fields (computers, mechanical engineering, etc.) often have educational and work backgrounds that are considerably different from workers who are engaged in "creative" areas of the company (marketing, public relations, etc.). These differences often manifest themselves in the modes of communication that the respective parties favor. "Engineers tend to be introverted and analytical with very logical ways of solving problems, " observed one software industry veteran in an interview with Monson. "Those in marketing tend to be extroverted and intuitive. It's a perennial source of possible contention, and really, it's just a matter of style."

Consultants and researchers agree, though, that many differences between these distinct functional cultures can be addressed through proactive policies that recognize that such differences exist and work to educate everyone about the legitimacy of each culture. "Today's dynamic marketplace demands that high-tech companies be able to move quickly, which in turn needs accurate communication, both with customers and among employees. Poor communication can mean loss of morale, production plunges, and perhaps even a failed start-up, " said Monson.

10 Steps to Crisis Communication

10 steps to crisis communication as follows:

a) Identify Crisis Communication Team
A small team of senior executives should be identified to serve as
Crisis Communication Team. Ideally, the team should be led by the
director of the department concerned and include the public
relations executive and legal counsel as his advisers.

b) Identify a spokesperson
There should be only one person who is authorized to speak for the
organization in time of crisis. Normally, the head of the Crisis
Communication Team should be the spokesperson. However,
communications skill is the primary criteria in choosing a
spokesperson.

c) Spokesperson training
The spokesperson should be given appropriate training to equip
him with appropriate skills. Through training, the spokesperson
should be taught how to be prepared, to be ready to respond in a
way that maximizes the chance of a story or analyst’s evaluation
coming out the way they want it to.

d) Establish communication protocol
An emergency communication plan should be established and
distributed to all employees, informing them precisely what to do
and who to do what if there appears to be a potential or occurrence
of a crisis.

e) Identify and know your ‘audiences’
It is crucial to identify the group of people who are interested in
seeking or bringing out the shortcomings of an organization and
make rapid contact with them, including the media, in time of crisis.

f) Anticipate crises
Be proactive and prepared for crises. Carry out brainstorming
sessions with members of the Crisis Communication Team on all
potential crises. By doing this, some situations can be prevented
by simply modifying existing methods of operation and team
members are able to think about possible responses and actions.

g) Assess crisis situation
Reacting without adequate information is not encouraged in any
crisis situation. The Crisis Communication Team should be
provided with accurate information for it to take appropriate action,
taking into account all necessary steps in curtailing the crisis.

h) Key messages
The Crisis Communication Team shall decide what or how much
information should be made public. Key messages should normally
include: “We will provide the media with updated information as
soon as it is available”.

i) Decide on communication methods
There are many different ways to communicate a crisis, internally or
externally. Employees, general public and clients can be briefed
personally or by post, newsletters or faxed messages. The media
can receive press releases and explanatory letters, or attend oneon-
one briefings and press conferences. Each of these options and
the many other available means have different impacts and must be
evaluated carefully before it is deployed.

j) Riding out the storm
No matter what the nature of the crisis, be it uplifting or derogatory,
despite it being meticulously attended to, there are bound to be
some members of the public who will not react the way we intend
them to and this can be immensely frustrating. When this happens,
the followings should be carried out:

• Take an objective look at the reactions in question. Is it our fault
or is it their perception?
• Decide if another set of communication is likely to change that
perception. Is that further communication beneficial and worth
the effort?

Theory X and Theory Y by Douglas McGregor

Douglas McGregor in his book, "The Human Side of Enterprise" published in 1960 has examined theories on behavior of individuals at work, and he has formulated two models which he calls Theory X and Theory Y.

Theory X Assumptions

The average human being has an inherent dislike of work and will avoid it if he can.

• Because of their dislike for work, most people must be controlled and threatened before they will work hard enough.
• The average human prefers to be directed, dislikes responsibility, is unambiguous, and desires security above everything.
• These assumptions lie behind most organizational principles today, and give rise both to "tough" management with punishments and tight controls, and "soft" management which aims at harmony at work.
• Both these are "wrong" because man needs more than financial rewards at work, he also needs some deeper higher order motivation - the opportunity to fulfill himself.
• Theory X managers do not give their staff this opportunity so that the employees behave in the expected fashion.

Theory Y Assumptions

• The expenditure of physical and mental effort in work is as natural as play or rest.
• Control and punishment are not the only ways to make people work, man will direct himself if he is committed to the aims of the organization.
• If a job is satisfying, then the result will be commitment to the organization.
• The average man learns, under proper conditions, not only to accept but to seek responsibility.
• Imagination, creativity, and ingenuity can be used to solve work problems by a large number of employees.
• Under the conditions of modern industrial life, the intellectual potentialities of the average man are only partially utilized.

Comments on Theory X and Theory Y Assumptions

These assumptions are based on social science research which has been carried out, and demonstrate the potential which is present in man and which organizations should recognize in order to become more effective.

McGregor sees these two theories as two quite separate attitudes. Theory Y is difficult to put into practice on the shop floor in large mass production operations, but it can be used initially in the managing of managers and professionals.

In "The Human Side of Enterprise" McGregor shows how Theory Y affects the management of promotions and salaries and the development of effective managers. McGregor also sees Theory Y as conducive to participative problem solving.

It is part of the manager's job to exercise authority, and there are cases in which this is the only method of achieving the desired results because subordinates do not agree that the ends are desirable.

However, in situations where it is possible to obtain commitment to objectives, it is better to explain the matter fully so that employees grasp the purpose of an action. They will then exert self-direction and control to do better work - quite possibly by better methods - than if they had simply been carrying out an order which the y did not fully understand.

The situation in which employees can be consulted is one where the individuals are emotionally mature, and positively motivated towards their work; where the work is sufficiently responsible to allow for flexibility and where the employee can see her or his own position in the management hierarchy. If these conditions are present, managers will find that the participative approach to problem solving leads to much improved results compared with the alternative approach of handing out authoritarian orders.

Once management becomes persuaded that it is under estimating the potential of its human resources, and accepts the knowledge given by social science researchers and displayed in Theory Y assumptions, then it can invest time, money and effort in developing improved applications of the theory.

The Grapevine

Grapevine is an organization's informal communication network. It is concluded that at least seventy-five percent of the noncontroversial organizationally related information carried by the grapevine is correct. Information that are emotionally charged and personal are most likely to be distorted. "Observation suggests several distinguishing features of grapevine systems:

- We generally think of the grapevine as communicating information by word of mouth. However, written notes, electronic mail, and fax m[e]ssages can contribute to the tranmission of information.

- Oranizations often have several grapevine systems, some of which may be loosely coordinated. For Instance, a secretary who is part of the 'office grapevine' might communicate information to a mail carrier, who passes it on to the 'warehouse grapevine.'

- The grapevine may transmit information relevant to the performance of the organization as well as personal gossip. Many times, it is difficult to distinguish between the two: 'You won't believe who just got fired!"' (Johns 349-50).

In the grapevine, personality may play a role. Those who lack self-esteem might pass on information that gives them a personal advantage. The more immediate the consequence, the more effective it is in changing behavior.

Penyambut Tetamu

Penyambut tetamu a.k.a receptionist adalah individu pertama kita temui (selain dari Pak Guard) apabila tiba di satu-satu organisasi. sudah tentu tugas mereka akan mencerminkan imej dan juga reputasi organisasi. Kita lazimnya akan memberikan persepsi dan justifikasi kita yang pertama dengan cara kita dilayan oleh peyambut tetamu.

Melihat kepada kepentingan ini, tugas sebagai penyambut tetamu bukanlah tugas yang mudah. Ironinya, seringkali tugas ini diberikan kepada pekerja yang baru bekerja a.k.a yang kurang pengalaman tentang syarikat a.k.a budak yang selalu blur bila ditanya.

Lazimnya, kita akan cukup meyampah apabila dilayan oleh receptionist yang tak tahu menjawab apabila ditanya dan perlu merujuk kepada pegawai di atas untuk melayan pertanyaan kita.

Keadaan ini boleh dan perlu diubah. Penyambut tetamu perlu memainkan peranan yang lebih penting dari sekadar berpakaian cantik, bermekap tebal, berbau wangi dan kadang-kala mereka yang kerjanya kurang efektif itu tak ubah seperti pasu bunga di front desk.


Memandangkan tugas ini penting untuk kepentingan imej dan juga prestasi organisasi, mereka yang berada di posisi yang lebih tinggi dan berpengalaman dalam organisasi boleh memainkan peranan sebagai penyambut tetamu.

Dengan cara ini, mereka yang berjawatan ini lebih memahami organisasi dan menyampaikan maklumat dengan lebih tepat kepada pelanggan. Malah ianya dapat melancarkan keberkesanaan komunikasi dalam sesebuah organisasi.

hey..kalau ada komen atau pendapat pasal perkara ni, pe g... bagi la komen...
komen yang berkaitan la...

Mekacih!

welcome

I created this blog as apart my assessment for course
Organisational Communication.
I'll post issue related with the subject. sounds boring huh?
But you can make it lively with your creative and brilliant ideas.
This blog really need your participation by drop your comment.
But... a brilliant comment please...?
Oh yeah, this blog will be conducted in bi language - English and Bahasa Malaysia, so don't let the language be the obstacle. ok enjoy blogging-lah!