– Individual Assignment: Think about a real situation that you witnessed and apply what you have learned. You should come up with recommendations that would lead to improvements in this sort of situation. – Requirement of the content: 1. Describe (max. 500 words) a situation that: • actually happened • you personally witnessed • raises an issue related to Managing People • shocked/impressed/amazed you 2. Choose two theoretical perspectives from those we discussed in the course, which you consider could help you better understand this situation. Describe the two theoretical perspectives and say something about why you chose these two theories. (max. 500 words) 3. Describe how each of the two perspectives helps you to better understand the situation. (Max 200 words) Suggested structure: I. Cover Page II. Introduction III. Analysis and Findings a. The situation (Q1) b. Literature Review (Q2&3) c. Recommendation IV. Conclusion V. References VI. Appendices Avoid plagiarism Format of citation: Harvard – Two theoretical perspectives based on this book:  




Essentials of Organizational Behavior

By (Name)

Name of the Class (Course)

Name of the Professor (Tutor)

Name of the School (University)


Essentials of Organizational Behavior

The situation

I am currently an intern at a newly established Bank, working in the department of sales and marketing. As interns, we are required to meet a target of at least ten members in a day who buys the shares of this bank. Payment is on commission, and failure to meet the target you are fired. We worked for a whole month using our own money to cater for transport and lunch, and there was no reimbursement at all, and unfortunately, we were all fired without pay because we could not meet the target set which was not reasonable. The manager in charge of sales and marketing perception was that the interns were lazy with no passion for their job.

Literature-the two theories

Theory X and Theory Y on motivation McGregor argue that managers make assumptions towards employees and the assumptions they make affect the behavior of the management towards employees. Theory X assumes that employees are lazy, not active, and also irresponsible, and these qualities hinder them from offering their best at work. Contrary theory Y assumes that human beings are very active and not lazy, and again they shape their selves and the environment that surrounds’ them (Aithal and Kumar,2016.). Therefore, staffs are capable of the zeal to achieve and are responsible, and this is what makes them do well at work.

Besides, Herzberg’s motivation theory argues that two factors have an impact on employee satisfaction, and these are motivating factors that are found on the actual job itself, and they cause employees to work harder. examples may include recognition, advancement, growth, responsibility, achievement, and the work itself. (Herzberg, 2017)The other one is the hygiene factor that causes staff to work less hard when it lacks, and these surround the actual job examples include supervision, relationship, salary and remunerations, work conditions, security, and company policies.

Why I decided to use the two theories is that in this bank I work for, they fired the interns as if their services were not to satisfactory while the intern expected to grow in line with their career. So I found Herzberg’s motivation theory best fit to address the problems by employees combined with theory XY that will help managers to handle employees better.

Perspective to a better understanding

To start with, the theory X and Y the management used just X the authoritarian style of management because their perception was that interns were not motivated and hated their work. Therefore needed to be directed and supervised constantly; that’s why they were not able to meet their target. This is not a suitable approach, especially to the interns; instead, they could have created a friendly environment for them. ( Robbins, and Judge, 2010)

The other theory for Herzberg focuses on two factors that affect employee motivation; these are the motivational factor group and the maintenance factors. The first one, the motivation factor, deals with psychological needs that are seen to bring extra benefits and include recognition, growth, and promotional opportunities that the bank did not offer.

The other one is the maintenance factor, which is required to avoid dissatisfaction. These factors are internal factor groups relating to the job, and they include pay, physical working conditions, and job security, and the bank did not guarantee this.


According to my findings on the analysis of the two theories, employers should adopt better management styles, especially those aimed at motivating workers to achieve excellent results.

By using Herzberg’s theory, the motivation theory, these factors are inherent to work, and they motivate employees for better performance. The managers should avoid full control of workers, and they will have some ownership of the work they do, and they are likely to become more responsible.

For the maintenance factors, the factors are intrinsic to work, unlike motivational factors. They include factors that are internal such as pay, which needs to be considerate and reasonable. The salary needs to be equivalent to those offered by other banks in the banking industry. The company policies need not be rigid, especially the one for paying workers commission in line with performance-based contracts. If the target given to interns were not achievable, then they could have revised this contract to a reasonable target.  greater pay dispersion typically results from individual performance pay schemes, and 
Kennedy (1995)
 shows that such schemes reduce the morale of the least productive workers and reduce their effort (productivity)

However, for McGregor X and Y model, the bosses should try at all costs and avoid the use of the X model and embrace the Y model. This is because the X model can reduce the morale and productivity of employees contrary to theory Y, in which managers believe that when employees are given the right conditions, they will like their job and become more creative. McGregor simply means managers should have a positive perception of workers and options that create job satisfaction.


The two theories can clearly show the best ways to manage employers and give better insights into the staff to motivate them to increase morale and productivity.


Aithal, P.S. and Kumar, P.M., 2016. Comparative analysis of theory X, theory Y, theory Z, and Theory A for managing people and performance. International Journal of Scientific Research and Modern Education (IJSRME), ISSN (Online), pp.2455-5630.

Herzberg, F., 2017. Motivation to work. Routledge.

Kennedy, P.W., 1995. Performance pay, productivity, and morale. Economic Record71(3), pp.240-247.

Robbins, S.P. and Judge, T., 2010. Essentials of Organizational Behavior, Person Education Publishing as Prentice Hall One Lake Street Upper Saddle River. New Jersey.