The Relationship of Managers' Theory X and Theory Y Assumptions to Managerial Participative Behavior, Employee Commitment, and Employee Absenteeism
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
University of Massachusetts Amherst ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst Doctoral Dissertations 1896 - February 2014 1-1-1989 The relationship of managers' theory X and theory Y assumptions to managerial participative behavior, employee commitment, and employee absenteeism. Richard Noel Logozzo University of Massachusetts Amherst Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umass.edu/dissertations_1 Recommended Citation Logozzo, Richard Noel, "The relationship of managers' theory X and theory Y assumptions to managerial participative behavior, employee commitment, and employee absenteeism." (1989). Doctoral Dissertations 1896 - February 2014. 6077. https://scholarworks.umass.edu/dissertations_1/6077 This Open Access Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. It has been accepted for inclusion in Doctoral Dissertations 1896 - February 2014 by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE RELATIONSHIP OF MANAGERS’ THEORY X AND THEORY Y ASSUMPTIONS TO MANAGERIAL PARTICIPATIVE BEHAVIOR, EMPLOYEE COMMITMENT, AND EMPLOYEE ABSENTEEISM A Dissertation Presented by RICHAftB-MOEL-LOGOSSO Submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Massachusetts in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY February 1989 School of Management © Copyright by Richard Noel Logozzo 1989 All Rights Reserved THE RELATIONSHIP OF MANAGERS' THEORY X AND THEORY Y ASSUMPTIONS TO MANAGERIAL PARTICIPATIVE BEHAVIOR, EMPLOYEE COMMITMENT, AND EMPLOYEE ABSENTEEISM A Dissertation Presented by RICHARD NOEL LOGOZZO Approved as to style and content by: D. Anthony Butterfield, Chairman of Committee Curt Tausky, Member Ronald Karren, Director School of Management To my parents, Arthur and Elia iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I am deeply grateful for the assistance which was so willingly given to me during this research project. Dr. D. Anthony Butterfield, Dr. Ronald Karren, Dr. Robert Marx, and Dr. Curt Tausky, the members of my dissertation committee, gave freely their time, energy, concern, and guidance. As Committee Chairman, Dr. Butterfield fielded, with equanimity, literally hundreds of questions from me. Also, Dr. Stanley Young offered valuable support and feedback. From these men I have learned much about the process and product of research. Dr. John Simmons and Dr. Michael Sutherland provided helpful advice in the formative stages of the study. The people in the insurance company where the data were collected were generous and kind. The director of field administration for the claim department brought the study to fruition by granting permission to collect data in the company and by offering sustained assistance. The manager of the claim department, along with the personnel coordinator, painstakingly explained much backround information. The office managers and personnel coordinators—and their assistants—in the field offices were consistently patient and helpful. The supervisors and claim processors promptly returned their questionnaires. V Insurance executives Janet Patchen and Janet Kalas cheerfully gave much assistance and shared their expertise. Cindy Bednarz scouted out certain insurance details for me. Susan Donnell responded quickly on behalf of Teleometrics International to give permission to use the Managerial Philosophies Scale. Two friends and classmates served as models and kept an eye on me. Dr. Mary Dereshiwsky enthusiastically answered questions and offered unbounded encouragement. Dr. Pam Sherer was able to get me moving when I got stuck. Friends Matthew Tallow, Clifford and Margaret Sargis, and Rick and Laura Kozin assisted with the preparation of the questionnaires and maintained sincere interest in my progress. Edward Myers checked frequently on my headway. My aunt, Dora Fontanella, typed—without flinching—part of the manuscript. My parents, family, and relatives gave support of many kinds. VI ABSTRACT THE RELATIONSHIP OF MANAGERS' THEORY X AND THEORY Y ASSUMPTIONS TO MANAGERIAL PARTICIPATIVE BEHAVIOR, EMPLOYEE COMMITMENT, AND EMPLOYEE ABSENTEEISM FEBRUARY 1989 RICHARD NOEL LOGOZZO, B.S., UNIVERSITY OF HARTFORD M.A., UNIVERSITY OF HARTFORD Ph.D., UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS Directed by: Professor D. Anthony Butterfield The purpose of this study was to implicate managerial assumptions in employee commitment and performance. Twenty-eight first-line managers in a large insurance company were administered the Managerial Philosophies Scale to determine each manager's affinity for Theory X and Theory Y. Two-hundred-nineteen insurance claim processors who were subordinates of the managers were administered a scale of participative decision making which measured each subordinate's perception of his/her manager's participative behavior. Subordinates were also administered a scale of organizational commitment which measured commitment to the employing company. An absenteeism measure was obtained for each subordinate through the use of personnel records. In accordance with management theory posited by Douglas McGregor, it was expected that managers' subscription to Theory X assumptions would be associated with a tendency to seldom allow subordinates to participate in decision making; subordinates so treated were vii expected to exhibit low organizational commitment and high absenteeism. Conversely, it was expected that managers' subscription to Theory Y assumptions would be associated with a tendency to frequently allow subordinates to participate in decision making; subordinates would respond with high organizational commitment and low absenteeism. Results compatible with expectations were: Managers' use of participative decision making was positively related to subordinates' organizational commitment; and, there was marginal support for a positive relationship between managers' subscription to Theory Y and subordinates' organizational commitment. A result which was opposite from expectation was that managers' participative behavior and subordinates' absenteeism were positively rather than negatively related. Though there was a trend for managerial assumptions to be related to the subordinate attitude of organizational commitment, the study was unable to directly relate managerial assumptions to the subordinate performance measure of absenteeism. • • • viii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS.v ABSTRACT.vii LIST OF TABLES.xi LIST OF FIGURES.xii Chapter 1. INTRODUCTION.1 2. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE.22 The Literature Which Pointed to Managerial Assumptions.22 Theory X, Theory Y, and the McGregor Model of Personal and Organizational Variables.27 Participative Behavior on the Part of Managers.48 Employee Commitment to Organizations.57 Absenteeism.65 The Relationship of Managerial Assumptions to Managerial Behavior, Employee Attitudes, and/or Performance Outcomes.70 The Relationship of Managerial Behavior to Organizational Commitment and/or Performance Outcomes.77 The Relationship of Organizational Commitment to Absenteeism and/or Performance Outcomes.81 Summary of Chapter 2.82 3. METHOD.89 Subjects.89 Instruments.104 An Additional Measure.110 Review of How to Score the Instruments.Ill Procedure.113 Statistical Analysis.120 4. RESULTS.129 Evaluation of the Research Hypotheses.138 Supplementary Results.143 IX Page 5. SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION.147 Summary of the Study.147 Findings and Issues Warranting Further Comment.149 This Study Compared with Previous Studies.161 Limitations of this Study.163 Additional Speculations.165 Conclusions and Implications for Practice.171 Recommendations for Future Research.175 APPENDICES.180 A. THE MANAGERIAL PHILOSOPHIES SCALE: COPIES OF BOTH SIDES OF THE FRONT COVER, PLUS TWO SAMPLE ITEMS....180 B. THE QUESTIONNAIRE FOR SUPERVISORS.184 C. THE QUESTIONNAIRE FOR SUBORDINATES.189 D. BRIEF RESEARCH PROSPECTUS PRESENTED TO THE CONTACT PERSON AT COMPANY X.196 E. LETTER TO THE FOUR OFFICE MANAGERS FROM THE DIRECTOR REQUESTING ASSISTANCE WITH THE RESEARCH.200 F. LETTER TO PERSONNEL COORDINATORS GIVING INSTRUCTIONS FOR QUESTIONNAIRE DISTRIBUTION.203 G. LETTER AND DATA-GATHERING FORM SENT TO PERSONNEL COORDINATORS REQUESTING ABSENTEEISM DATA.206 H. THANK-YOU LETTER TO OFFICE MANAGERS.210 I. THANK-YOU LETTER TO PERSONNEL COORDINATORS.212 j; RESPONSE RATE FOR EACH SUPERVISOR’S GROUP OF CLAIM PROCESSORS.214 K. THEORY X AND THEORY Y RAW SCORES FOR SUPERVISORS.216 L. GROUP SCORES FOR EACH SUPERVISOR.218 M. EFFECT OF SUBORDINATES' POSITION GRADE LEVEL.220 N. ADDITIONAL PERFORMANCE MEASURES.227 O. SUMMARY REPORT FOR PARTICIPANTS AT COMPANY X.232 BIBLIOGRAPHY.237 X LIST OF TABLES Page 2.1. Propositions of McGregor's Theory X and Theory Y.28 3.1. Number of Claim Processors (in Grades 22-25) and Claim- Processor Supervisors Targeted as Subjects.92 3.2. Sex, Age, Education, and Tenure Reported by the 28 Supervisors.102 3.3. Sex, Age, Education, and Tenure Reported by the 219 Claim Processors.103 4.1. Coefficient Alpha for Each Scale.131 4.2. Descriptive Statistics on Theory X and Theory Y Raw Scores for Supervisors; n=28.132 4.3. Descriptive Statistics on Raw Scores for Subordinates; n=219.133 4.4. Descriptive Statistics on Group Scores; n=28.135 4.5. Effect of PDM/OC Scale Order.136 4.6. Pearson Correlations Between Key Variables; n=:28.137 4.7. Hierarchical Analysis When THX and THY Were Entered Simultaneously into Regression Equations; n=28.139 4.8. Hierarchical Analysis When THX and THY Were Entered Separately into Regression Equations; n=28.140 4.9. Summary of Hypothesis Outcomes.144