Project Manager Guy

Cause and Effect - The laws of Karma

"Every action has an equal and opposite reaction." - Isaac Newton

Every cause has a corresponding effect, however, the consequence and the predictability of the cause may not be predicted at that very moment. One knows it very well that if he/she has taken a debt, then the repayment of the debt has to be done. The person is well aware of the fact that if the debts are not repaid, then the lender possesses the right to seize the collateral security of the borrower. If there is discontent with the resulting effect of some action, then the only method of changing it is to create a new cause. However, there might be occasions when it might be too late for changing the present circumstances. In such cases, it is essential to bring about changes in the future, so that a good future prevents the recurrence of the past. People organize heir future by managing the cause and effect.

Human dynamics are a lot like the laws of physics in that they result from components (people) interacting with one another, not merely within one entity. All of your actions combine to create your persona or the "aura" you project to others. People generally gravitate toward others whose with thought processes and behaviors similar to theirs. On the other side of the coin, when we dislike others, it is most probably because their attitudes and beliefs are different from ours. When two parties relate, both persons’ decisions create "causes," and the resultant "effects" are the congruity and harmony in their relationship. In this world where it is crucial to network with one another, someone who often finds him or herself in a position of incompatibility with others will probably not be successful. Therefore, it is important that people who wish to succeed determine what has caused them to make the choices that have led to rejection for them. Changing one’s destiny hinges on a person’s ability to change him or herself.

The method of execution is as much a cause as the action itself. If a like or dislike is expressed with respect, then it demonstrates awareness of other people who are exposed to the expression. The internal cause of the feeling being expressed is a sign of the individual's opinion which may not be shared by the audience, but the effect of a respectful delivery is usually a respectful reception. Exchanges of a positive nature are beneficial even if they are exchanges of disagreements; mastery of cause and effect is a direct path to success in the broadest sense since it exists whether or not people are aware of it. Actively manipulating causes such as your own behavior directly implies active manipulation of the effect - the opinions of others about you.

People who follow similar patterns to create confidence become successful. They are always confident of everything and have a good knowledge of what they do and offer it to others thereby generating more support and rewards in their career. This type of positive interaction is ideal for anyone to become successful by building extraordinary behavior. Success does not come accidentally but one has to strive hard to get it with logical events.

Failure is also the logical result of logical events, you don't need a cause and effect diagram to tell you that. The choices a person makes affect the choices others make, and if those choices are bad then the results will be too. Who a person associates with himself is an extension of who that person is. If you are not attracting the kind of people you want to attract, then it is up to you to discover what it is that would attract them then decide if you are prepared to make that change. The person you are today is the product of who you chose to be when you were younger, and the what defines the leader you will be tomorrow are the actions you choose to pursue today.

Is Group Motivation Possible?

 

Can a nation be motivated just as individuals can?  Admittedly, as any entity becomes more thoroughly controlled by organisms (such as people) that entity begins to exhibit organic characteristics.

As the Indian government has modified the rules for writing  annual reports on senior bureaucrats to provide a more transparent appraisal in use elsewhere, Sangram Mishra on Daily Pioneer suggests that the bureaucracy, as a whole, might be motivated to maintain their ethics despite the power and control afforded by their senior positions.  Read this exerpt from his posting:

 

Maslow's theory of needs and self-actualization has already been discussed, when applied to motivational concepts, can be stated as that the physiological needs and safety needs of the bureaucracy should be taken care of first for maximizing the developmental outputs. This can be stated in other words that salary, shelter (physiological needs) and seniority, financial stability, status (safety and social needs) should be ensured for the bureaucracy in order to get success from them.

Even Clayton P Alderfer's ERG theory also stressed similar points. This theory is based on the three concepts of existence, relatedness and growth. A little different from Maslow's theory in the sense that it does not rank needs in any particular order and recognizes that more than one need may operate at a given time. This theory has a frustration-regression hypothesis, suggesting that one person or officer, who is frustrated in his attempt to satisfy his needs, may regress to another one. For example, an officer, who is sidetracked and frustrated by the lack of growth opportunities in his job and slow progress towards career goals, may regress to related needs and start spending more time socializing with his coworkers or pursue his creative talents to excel in other spheres.  The ERG theory is based on three concepts like existence needs, related needs and growth needs. Satisfaction in existence needs like salary, status, stability, takes to related needs and progression in related needs takes to growth needs, but regression and frustration bring him back to existence needs only.

The other theories like Theory X and Theory Y also stress motivational aspects. The Theory Y states that motivation occurs at the social, esteem and self-actualization levels as well as at the physiological and security levels, and people can be self-directed and creative at work if properly motivated where as the Theory X states motivation occurs only at the physiological and safety levels, which may not be correct.

Herzberg’s two-factor theory also states hygiene and motivation factors as the main factors to motivate. While hygiene factors encompass quality of supervision, pay, physical working condition, job security, motivational factors include promotion opportunities, recognition, opportunities for personal growth and achievement.

The McClelland theory of needs identifies three needs of importance in the workplace: power needs, achievement needs and affiliation needs. Power needs are stated as power of influencing others, defeating an opponent or competitor, attaining position of greater authority.  People with a low need for power may lack the assertiveness and self-confidence to achieve targeted goals. Affiliation needs are illustrated as friendly relationship enjoying social activities, cooperative attitude and acceptance. Achievement needs are reflected in attaining challenging goals, setting new standard and records, successful completion of difficult tasks, etc.

All the theories described here on motivational concepts have been successfully implemented by the private sector for its greatest advantage. All these theories and hypotheses pinpoint one thing that is the workforce (bureaucracy) should be motivated for obtaining maximum developmental outputs, otherwise regression would take control of the workforce with manifested frustration, and thereby achievement of goals would remain distant dreams.

While these motivation theories make perfect sense on a case-by-case basis, as individuals.  Game theory, however,  teaches us of the mass motivational concepts of prisoner's dilemma and zero sum.  Both of these together, ensure that the greedier of a mass will attempt to take advantage of the rest of the group in order to protect themselves from the negative behaviors of the rest of the mass, ensuring a downward spiral of deceit and treachery in order for any one individual to maximize their share of the pie within the ecosystem and minimize the impact of the treachery from others.

Theory X vs. Theory Y YouTube Playlist

Douglas McGregor offered a pair of divergent viewpoints of employee motivation as the basis for differing management decisions. McGregor's Theory X and Theory Y manifested these unique ways of viewing the drives and thought patterns of people. McGregor represented those who saw staff members to be lazy individuals as Theory X, the established management method of the day. These Theory X leaders think that employees steer clear of accountability and function solely while threatened. Theory Y, however, symbolized supervisors who believed that the workforce normally want to perform and to do a good job.

I found a few good videos on Theory X vs Theory Y on YouTube.

There were quite a few very poorly done ones to sift through, so I put the best ones into a playlist.  This is my first YouTube playlist, so I'm not sure how well I've done with it.  There are so many different options available on those things.  So, here's my first shot at it.  Let me know what you think.

Managing People: Theory X vs Theory Y Managers

Douglas McGregor,  MIT professor, has demonstrated two famous theories on the subject of motivation of employees. They are referred to as McGregor Theory X and Theory Y. The former talks about less ambitious workers who do not really like to do the work assigned to them and need to be controlled in order to complete their tasks.

Theory Y, on the other hand, features people who are dedicated to their work and enjoy the tasks they are assigned. They are considered more responsible towards achieving their targets and also provide hard work to maintain quality of their products.

In a company or organization, it can prove to be a lot of trouble if workers are disinterested and lazy. The company may have to suffer huge losses due to the reduced total quality of the workforce it has and consequently, consumers or end users will tend to dislike the products or services delivered.  It is also the company's responsibility to understand and value its workers so that they can feel more confident.

A sound analogy of worker-employer relationship according to Theory Y can be that of a family in which a kid is taken care of by his/her parents. Such a manager would develop great bonding with the workers and make sure the team works as a unit.

If a manager believes in the philosophy of Theory X, he would absolutely not cherish the work done by the employees and take that work for granted. He would practice extreme measures like firing an individual as a response to poor work performance.

A company abiding by Theory X management style would not provide sufficient training and introduction to its new employees. It will simply ask them to start working right from day one and will load them with huge assignments and sharp deadlines. Eventually, they pick up the top performers and kick out the underperformers. The Apprentice, a reality show was carved out from such a philosophy.

Managers belonging to Theory Y give more freedom to their employees so that the environment is friendly to work in. It is fun to work in such environments for the workers. This ease of work later reflects in the company's profits.

A manager should, ideally, treat new hires equally and also consider their perspective of going about with business. This can help the company tremendously as new hires bring fresh ideas and techniques of smart work. This will not only benefit the company's interest, but also motivate the workers by boosting their confidence as their say is valued.

Finally, we can define the term motivation as, a sense of willingness to contribute towards something that would fetch solutions to a particular need. This can be understood well with the real life example of people working hard to earn money so that they can buy food (which is a need).