William Ouchi created his Theory Z, as a response to the success of Japanese manufacturing. Its name is a deliberate nod to McGregor's Theory X and Theory Y. Thank you for watching - please do like, subscribe, and hit the notification bell.
I love topics like this. Theories on management. If you want you can also make video about Ohio Studies and Managerial Grid by Blake & Mouton. It is related to Theory X & Y as well.
I am glad you liked this and it's good of you to make the offer. I shall make a video about Mouton and Blake. It will be part of my course on Leadership that will start in September 2023. I expect the Blake Mouton model will feature in a video either at the very end of 2023 or early in 2024, alongside videos about other styles-based models of leadership. See you then!
This has been very useful! I would like to say, from what I've observed the youtube algorithm favors "trendy videos". So look at current news and react to that from a management perspective I guess. I don't have any ideas, but good luck!
Thank you. I know it is possible to 'game' TH-cam's algorithms. But my purpose in building this channel is to create a library of videos that will be useful to people like you in the long term.
hello mike, how are you? thank you very much for your knowledge about theory x, y, z. im a master student in management and leadership, and i'm currently doing an assignment for leadership and organisational psy. i'm just wondering if you could critic on self-determination theory and theory x,y,z and their strength and weakness. and which one is more suitable in a contingency/ situational leadership context? thank you very much
I do hope you aren't trying to get me to answer an assignment! I don't do that, on principle. So, I shall try to be helpful, while leaving you to do some work. Both models can be helpful in thinking about situational leadership. But neither is 'more suitable'. Situational leadership is about choosing a leadership style that fits the situation. And, as Tannenbaum & Schmidt tell us, one relevant consideration is the forces in the follower. ANd one of these forces is what motivates them. So, to me, the overlap is clear. But why just these two particular motivation models? Others feed into understanding how to lead too!
i think self-determination is very evidence-based and with many empirical research supporting its validity in the Europe and the collective west and possibly is a leading theory. While Theory X, Y, Z seems to me has not been working very well in the west, possibly because of culture differences (Anglo vs Confucius culture) and i pretty much sure that leadership should be applied accordingly. according to different context/ situation/ landscape/culture. it seems to me that these 2 theories are very similar with the exception of theory Z which is developed by Japanese William Ouchi (confucius culture). Now Hong Kong is primarily a Chinese society although it was a Crown colony ( largely another confucius culture). and it seems the comparison between these 2 theories is often cannot be found both in google scholar and youtube. i'm wondering if i can view a leadership style as a big "system" which the motivational theory is one of the component of the whole leadership style. i'm on a paper about transformational shared and distributed leadership work. may be i'm wong in the concept. but why i was asking, because i think will it be possible for motivation models be fitted into transformational leadership's inspirational motivation as a mini-model? thank you very much for the insight. Best Regards, keith
William Ouchi created his Theory Z, as a response to the success of Japanese manufacturing. Its name is a deliberate nod to McGregor's Theory X and Theory Y. Thank you for watching - please do like, subscribe, and hit the notification bell.
🧟♀️
Love that T-shirt Color Change
Thank you!
thank you so much
it really helped
Glad it helped!
I love topics like this. Theories on management. If you want you can also make video about Ohio Studies and Managerial Grid by Blake & Mouton. It is related to Theory X & Y as well.
I am glad you liked this and it's good of you to make the offer. I shall make a video about Mouton and Blake. It will be part of my course on Leadership that will start in September 2023. I expect the Blake Mouton model will feature in a video either at the very end of 2023 or early in 2024, alongside videos about other styles-based models of leadership. See you then!
This has been very useful! I would like to say, from what I've observed the youtube algorithm favors "trendy videos". So look at current news and react to that from a management perspective I guess. I don't have any ideas, but good luck!
Thank you. I know it is possible to 'game' TH-cam's algorithms. But my purpose in building this channel is to create a library of videos that will be useful to people like you in the long term.
hello mike, how are you?
thank you very much for your knowledge about theory x, y, z.
im a master student in management and leadership, and i'm currently doing an assignment for leadership and organisational psy. i'm just wondering if you could critic on self-determination theory and theory x,y,z and their strength and weakness. and which one is more suitable in a contingency/ situational leadership context?
thank you very much
especially in a hong kong public service culture, would it still better to use theory x,y,z rather than self-determination theory?
I do hope you aren't trying to get me to answer an assignment! I don't do that, on principle. So, I shall try to be helpful, while leaving you to do some work. Both models can be helpful in thinking about situational leadership. But neither is 'more suitable'. Situational leadership is about choosing a leadership style that fits the situation. And, as Tannenbaum & Schmidt tell us, one relevant consideration is the forces in the follower. ANd one of these forces is what motivates them. So, to me, the overlap is clear. But why just these two particular motivation models? Others feed into understanding how to lead too!
i think self-determination is very evidence-based and with many empirical research supporting its validity in the Europe and the collective west and possibly is a leading theory. While Theory X, Y, Z seems to me has not been working very well in the west, possibly because of culture differences (Anglo vs Confucius culture) and i pretty much sure that leadership should be applied accordingly. according to different context/ situation/ landscape/culture.
it seems to me that these 2 theories are very similar with the exception of theory Z which is developed by Japanese William Ouchi (confucius culture).
Now Hong Kong is primarily a Chinese society although it was a Crown colony ( largely another confucius culture). and it seems the comparison between these 2 theories is often cannot be found both in google scholar and youtube.
i'm wondering if i can view a leadership style as a big "system" which the motivational theory is one of the component of the whole leadership style.
i'm on a paper about transformational shared and distributed leadership work. may be i'm wong in the concept. but why i was asking, because i think will it be possible for motivation models be fitted into transformational leadership's inspirational motivation as a mini-model?
thank you very much for the insight.
Best Regards,
keith
@@lukkeith3894 I agree that you cannot build a satisfactory model of leadership without a good understanding of motivation.
hi mike, can you describe the characteristic of theory Z?
I don't understand what you mean by 'the characeteristic of theory z'. What do you need to know that is not in the video?
「あなたの動画はとても良いですし、メッセージがた
Thank you.
[from Google Translate: "Your video is very good and you got a message]
theory Zしか勝たん
Google translates that as Japanese for 'Only Won' - Thank you.