ASSIGNMENT #01

BKF4812 Process Engineering Management

(Sem. II - 2019/20)

Prepared by: MUSTAF MOHAMED

ID: KA15301
LECTURERS:
HJ. M NOOR NAWI
PROF. ZULKAFLI HASSAN
DR. SHAIFUL ZAIDI MD
DATE: 12/06/2020
Introduction

Theory X and Theory Y

Theory X and Theory Y are theories of human motivation created and developed by social
psychologist Douglas McGregor (1960). Theory X and Y which deals with the motivational
factors that influence employee behaviour was one of the theories. Since Theory X and Y dealing
with a complete system of interaction, similar to how a physical model simulates the behaviour
of a physical system, Theory X and Y considered as ‘models’. Theory X and Y created by
McGregor has been a valid basic principle from which to develop positive management style and
techniques in corporate management. McGregor's ideas suggest that there are two fundamental
approaches to managing people. Several managers influenced by Theory Y, and generally get
poor results. On the other hand, liberal managers use Theory Y, which produces better
performance and results, and allows people to grow and develop.

Theory X managers assume that workers are lazy, will avoid responsibility, and prefer to just get
by. Theory X assumptions believe that workers must be controlled and threatened with
punishment (Allio, 2009). Conversely, McGregor saw Theory Y managers as those that hold
assumptions that workers care about the organization, will seek responsibility, and exercise self-
control. Bobic and Davis (2003) found that most of the population has the ability to be
innovative and creative. This finding supports the argument that Theory Y assumptions
contribute positively toward more participative decision-making, ultimately benefitting the
organization (Russ, 2011). Based on this clarification about the theory, author chose the KNM
Process Sdn Bhd is to clarify and explain about how the theory being applied in corporate
communication in the organization.

Human Resource Management

Hypothesis X and Y is a portrayal of the observation administrators have about their workers.

It isn't about their general direct outside the work place, it relates on their action, while working
in the affiliation. The 'Hypothesis X' the board acknowledge agents are naturally lethargic and
will avoid chip away at the remote possibility that they can and that they typically disdain work.
In like manner, the officials acknowledges that workers ought to be regulated intently and
exhaustive structures of controls be made.

A progressive structure with thin range of control is required at every single level. As
demonstrated by this hypothesis, delegates will show little enthusiasm without an alluring
motivation program and will keep up a key good ways from works at whatever point they can.

Hypothesis X chiefs rely strongly upon danger and dread to get their laborers' fulfillment.
Hypothesis X chairmen present a tyrant style in which emphasis is laid on yield. It accept that
workers are focused on association's goals. It is the executives' primary undertaking in such a
framework to shape the representatives and amplify their responsibility. Hypothesis Y pioneers
are participative pioneers - otherwise called just pioneers; it is accepted to be the best initiative
style in the present business world.

Hypothesis Y is a participative style of the association/the executives which acknowledge that

people will rehearse self-course and poise in achieving the hierarchical destinations and
objectives. Hypothesis Y pioneers are participative pioneers - in any case called vote based
pioneers; it is acknowledged to be the best style in the present business world. Popularity based
pioneers offer direction to bunch individuals, they give sensible self-governance to their
subordinates and permit them to take part in the gathering. They offer significance to data
sources and thoughts from their gathering individuals.

The gathering individuals are effectively urged to take an interest, however the hypothesis Y
pioneer despite everything hold the last say over the dynamic procedure

Gigantic changes in merchandise and enterprises creation framework has brought about the vital
significance of human resources.In prior modern frameworks, individuals were operationally or
strategically noteworthy regarding last items. For instance, individuals are operational assets in
situations where they serve just as basic work from which physical items or other routine
administrations are determined (Cleveland, 1985, pp. 20-21). Assembling and office activities in
prior occasions depended on a mechanical type of association where specific packs of errands,
obligations, and duties characterized positions into which individuals were put to create last
items. Such associations were proper subjects for mechanical specialists, for example, Frederick
W. Taylor. Those strategies for works and authoritative proficiency (Taylor, 1947) were because
of across the board utilization of fundamental redundant schedules and items (Scientific
American, 1982). Individuals are named as strategically noteworthy assets as they are liable for
complex sending choices to arrange the creation of complex fabricated merchandise and ventures
in cutting edge mechanical circumstances. In this day and age, strategically, human work is all
the more exceptionally prepared, progressively changed, less effectively tradable, and can be
fluctuated with respect to complex hierarchical game plans than in early mechanical frameworks.

When do individuals become a vital asset?

A key human capital is straightforwardly utilized in open office objectives. Their ability are
combined to the items delivered. The combination of individual, position, and item can happen
in two way-when the "item" is information based and when that creation relies on a "brilliant"
creation process. In such cases, where the detachment of human capital from the yield is foggy,
individuals are the item.
Hierarchical Behavior

It is alluded to as the investigation of human conduct in the work environment, the connection
among individuals and the association which intends to comprehend and anticipate human
conduct. It inspects human conduct, perspectives and execution inside an authoritative setting.
Authoritative conduct expects to find out about individual recognition, qualities, and learning
limits, activity of individuals in an association while depending on hypothesis, techniques and
standards as its reason for learning. The association depends on the board's way of thinking,
qualities, vision and objectives. This thusly drives the authoritative culture which involves the
conventional association, casual association, and the social condition.

The kind of administration, correspondence, and gathering elements inside the association is
controlled by the way of life. Nature of work life is the discernment the laborers have guiding
them towards inspiration. It brings about execution, singular fulfillment, and self-awareness and
advancement. A mix of every one of these components assists with building the model or
structure that the association works from.

Jobs and duties are to be assigned and created. Work of a wide range of individuals guarantees
an assorted workforce in an association. Hierarchical conduct can be ordered into four
classifications, in particular absolutist, custodial, steady and collegial.

In the totalitarian model, the force rests with an administrative direction of power. The workers
are subject to the chief. The need of means of the representative is met. The outcome is
negligible exhibition. This is the quality of hypothesis X conduct. In custodial model, the
financial assets are with administrative direction of cash. Security advantages and reliance on the
association are direction of the representatives. The worker need of security is met. This
outcomes in detached collaboration. This is likewise a quality of hypothesis X conduct.

While, in the strong model, the authority is went with an administrative direction of help.
Accordingly the workers are arranged towards work execution and investment. The
representative increases status and acknowledgment which is their need in such manner. The
presentation result is stirred drives. This is the trait of hypothesis Y conduct. In collegial model is
association with an administrative direction of cooperation. Accordingly workers are situated
towards capable conduct and self-restraint. The worker need of self-realization is met. The
exhibition result is moderate excitement. This is likewise an attribute of hypothesis Y conduct.

Hypothesis X/Y and conduct - Research proposes that how the conduct of subordinates are
influenced by their bosses' Theory X/Y demeanor. For instance, the examination of connection
between administrators' Theory X/Y mentality and their initiative conduct by Fiman (1973)
demonstrated a positive connection between subordinate impression of boss Theory Y demeanor
and thought conduct. Also, the disclosure of negative connection between subordinate view of
boss Theory Y disposition and starting structure conduct was finished by Fiman.

Extra data and backing for a connection between Theory X/Y direction and conduct was given
by Neuliep (1987). His examination of connection between directors' Theory X and Y
presumptions and their decision of consistence picking up procedures, prompted the disclosure
that the more Theory X-situated supervisors were, the more noteworthy their inclinations for the
reserved enticing message types known as double dealing, aversive incitement, and danger.
Conversely, Theory Y-slanted chiefs favored prosocial influential message types known as
ingratiation and regard.

Preferences may be offered by conduct arranged X/Y scale. Albeit dependent on self-report
information, its vulnerability to social allure and self-introduction predispositions may be less.
As for this, clearly the vast majority of the directors consider themselves to be nearer to Theory
Y than Theory X in their perspectives (Fiman, 1973; Heil et al., 2000).

Hierarchical Communication

Sending and getting of messages through images is called correspondence and in that relevantly,
hierarchical correspondence is a key component of authoritative atmosphere. Working of
relationship is the most significant job of hierarchical correspondences. It gives solid premise if
there should arise an occurrence of emergency the board and helps while confronting the
adjustments in association. Confidence of representatives is raised and more commitment is
made by them to vital objectives of the association.

It is very apparent that it is difficult to make any business without great authoritative
correspondence and without the workers, who are the most significant partners of any
association. Terrible correspondence among supervisors and representatives will bring about
clashes inside the organization what will farther prompt good declination and friends not having
the option to arrive at its vital objectives. Then again, correspondence with normal spans,
particularly with youthful representatives will support worker's innovativeness and experience.
All procedures in organization are straightforwardly relative to individuals' conduct and
correspondence among them.

Both casual and formal correspondence are utilized in an association. An immediate connection
between subordinates' view of oppressive management and their revealed degrees of passionate
weariness, misery, tension, clash among family and work, and occupation turnover was found by
Tepper (2000). It is required for the associations to anticipate all the more precisely how
candidates for prevalent positions would speak with subordinates, given the possible impacts of
predominant communicator style. Reliance of such expectation lies on the recognizable proof of
individual-contrast factors that may impact unrivaled communicator style.

The outcomes of showing certain communicator style profiles were analyzed by the specialists.
The presence of huge evicence that people's communicator styles impact their degree of
fulfillment with a social collaboration are impressive. The investigation of level of comparability
among better and subordinate communicator styles relating than subordinate fulfillment was
finished by Infante and Gorden (1981). Their outcomes demonstrated that subordinate fulfillment
is associated with predominant subordinate.

According to Norton (1983), the communicator style of an individual profile comprises of their
scores on 11 style factors, 10 free factors and 1 ward variable. The 10 autonomous factors are
benevolent, impression leaving, argumentative, loose, mindful, exact, enlivened, sensational,
open, and prevailing. The main ward variable is communicator picture, which is a person's
abstract self-appraisal of how well the individual speaks with others (Norton, 1983).

His thinking that "the prevailing communicator has capable capacities to control discussions
intelligently" is responsible for this relationship to exist. Hypothesis X bosses are under the
feeling that individuals must be forced, controlled, and compromised with discipline to get them
to work so as to understand the accomplishment of authoritative objectives.(McGregor, 1960, p.
34)Based on these cases, it was found by Neuliep (1987) that hypothesis X arranged supervisors
had inclinations for the standoffish influential message types known as double dealing, aversive
incitement, and danger therefore a show of Dominant communicator style disposition toward
their subordinates is their trademark. Steady style – As it was called attention to by Schultz
(1996) that "There is without a doubt an innate hostility between nudging individuals to work
and staying on great footing with them" (p. 98).

The grinding dependent on lingo between task administration and upkeep authority makes it
uncomfortable for bosses to display the two jobs all the while (Bales, 1950). Because of their
attention on task initiative, Theory X bosses are moderately far-fetched to invest energy showing
upkeep authority, which is comprehensive of being strong of their subordinates.

A commonplace subordinate's characteristic want to work, show of self-course at work, and

capacity to produce innovative answers for authoritative issues (McGregor, 1960) are an
aftereffect of the suspicion of hypothesis Y unrivaled and that why they may feel that it is
pointless to concentrate on task administration. Rather, Theory Y bosses center lies around
urging their subordinates to step up to the plate and accomplish hierarchical objectives. It is the
attribute of the Supportive communicator style to show such consolation.

Hypothesis Y better's warm style profile may serve than fortify subordinates' feeling of worth
and enhance their feeling of relatedness. This style is seen as profoundly affirming by
subordinates.

Then again, Theory X better's virus style profile may work than uplift subordinates' feeling of
relational separation among self and other. Therefore, this style is seen as disconfirming.

Authoritative Development

Association Development is an undertaking planned, organization-wide, and oversaw from the

top, so as to develop organization impact and condition with arranged impedance in
the organization's 'processes,' utilizing social science information.

Work on OD in associations are connected with their quickly changing and complex situations
through organizational learning, knowledge management and change of authoritative standards
and qualities. Key ideas of OD hypothesis include: the atmosphere of the association which
alludes to the special "character" of an association, which incorporates mentalities and
convictions that impact members' collective behavior, the culture of the organization which
alludes the profoundly situated standards, qualities and practices that individuals share and
hierarchical techniques which clarifies how association distinguishes issues, plans activity,
arranges change and assesses progress.

A portion of the guiding principle of hidden association advancement are humanistic values

which were enunciated regarding OD by Margulies and Raia (1972) as follows - Association can
be created by the fundamental beliefs, for example, to give chances to individuals to work as
people instead of as assets in the profitable procedure, giving every association part chance to
create to their maximum capacity, improve the viability of the association as far as the entirety of
its objectives, making of a workplace where it is energizing and testing to work, give chances to
make them powerful the manner by which they identify with work, the association, and nature
and to treat every human with an intricate arrangement of requirements.

A fruitful hierarchical advancement will have the accompanying goals – it will urge to build the
degree of between close to home trust among representatives, to build up the degree of
fulfillment and responsibility in workers, to confront issues as opposed to maintaining a strategic
distance from them, to oversee struggle viably, to energize collaboration among representatives,
to increment authoritative critical thinking and to put forms that will help improve the
progressing activity of an association consistently. The center goal of authoritative improvement
is to upgrade the association's ability to deal with its inner and outer working and connections.
This comprehensive of better relational and gathering forms, powerful correspondence, and
improved capacity to adapt to hierarchical issues of various sorts.
The noticeable quality of Theory X/Y is viewed as significant as to issues identified with
authority and authoritative turn of events, and a proportion of X/Y practices may encourage
considerable exploration in various zones.

Occupation Satisfaction

Applying hypothesis X and Y in Job fulfillment can be comprehended from this model. During
the 1990s, Americans turned out to be progressively disappointed with their occupations.
According to a Conference Board review of 5,000 families led by NFO Research Incorporated,
there was a 8 percent decrease in generally speaking employment fulfillment among U.S.
laborers in the last 50% of the decade (58.6 percent were "fulfilled" or "fulfilled" in 1995, and
just 50.7 percent were fulfilled or exceptionally fulfilled in 2000; Conference Board [CB]
2000).Americans were more disappointed with their work than the representatives in Denmark,
the Philippines, Cyprus, Switzerland, Israel, Spain, or The Netherlands (Oswald 1999).It was
found by Oswald that the level of Americans who were "fulfilled or totally fulfilled" with their
occupations was just 49%.Highest wellspring of disappointment was found among minorities
and ladies with current business (United Press International [UPI] 2001; Schmidt 1999), While
the most significant levels of fulfillment was seen with higher officials and increasingly senior
faculty (Hamermesh 2001; Traut, Larsen, and Feimer 2000).

A considerable decrease in work satisfication is accounted for in ongoing surverys of newsroom

representatives (UPI 2001), nursing experts, specialists, community workers (Barrows and
Wesson 2000), and government funded teachers (National Center for Education Statistics
1997).However, it is uncovered in every one of the investigation that disappointment changes
extraordinarily relying upon the sexual orientation, residency, position, and pay of respondents.
Pay and advantages was the part of work most representatives discovered disappointing (Hart
and Associates 1998; CB 2000), trailed by headway openings (CB 2000; Barrows and Wesson
2000), while disappointment with the idea of the activity itself positioned practically last. In any
case, not all studies discover significant levels of disappointment with work.

The survery directed by Conference Board, for instance found a decrease in general employment
fulfillment from 1995 to 2000. The study led by PRN News Service found that, about 70%
reacted that they had work fulfillment. Lesser laborers expected sati sfaction in their
employments of what Maslow would call regard or self-realizing needs (Hart and Associates
1998; PRN 2001). A differentiation was found in needs fulfillment additionally when contrasting
open chiefs with private-segment supervisors (Lan and Rainey 1992; Crewson 1997).

The consequences of this examination underpins a prior discoveries of investigation of what

representatives need from occupations led by Boris Blai (1964). It was found by Blai that there
were rising degrees of conern about lower level needs in representatives working in hands on,
while upper-level, clerical workers looked to fulfill higher-request needs from their work.
Because of the unstability and uncertainity of the present workplace contrasted with 1950s and
1960s, one could basically express that Theory X the board is progressively predominant in this
conditions (Collins 1996) and significantly as unmistakable as Theory Y the executives. All
things considered, the contention of McGregor said that the workplace of his day offered (or
ought to have offered) individuals more noteworthy opportunities to satisfy themselves, an
arrival to an increasingly unsure time ought to make the contrary condition. However, the issue
is considerably more mind boggling than that: There may not be an unmistakable connection
between work execution and requirements fulfillment (Kirton and Hammond 1980). Late grant
has brought up significant issues about the order of requirements as a hypothetical and
observational idea.

Management and Tasks Without Direct Supervision

The job of occupation fulfillment is featured by hypothesis Y which urges laborers to move
toward undertakings without direct supervision, while the significance of increased direct
management is supported by hypothesis X. The nature of the connection between a chief and
subordinate can be portrayed regarding the pioneer part trade (LMX) hypothesis (Dienesch and
Liden, 1986; Gerstner and Day, 1997; Liden, Sparrowe, and Wayne, 1997).The contention of
LMX hypothesis recommends that one of a kind connections are created among pioneers and
various subordinates and that the nature of these connections decides how each subordinate will
be dealt with (Graen and Uhl-Bien, 1995). As per McGregor (1960, 1966), the utilization of
either Theory X or Theory Y standards should be possible by chiefs and this doesn't keep them
from being delegated Theory X or Y supervisors.

Hypothesis X standard based administration style applied by the administrators, in which

subordinates are pressured and controlled to do what is officially required by their sets of
expectations.

While hypothesis Y standards, which are portrayed by trust, regard and commitment. At the
point when an administrator applies Theory Y standards, self-rule and duty regarding work is
given and more open doors which brings about ID of issues and finding their innovative
arrangements. (McGregor, 1960, 1966; McGregor and Cutcher-Gershenfeld, 2006). Which
brings about subordinates seeing that the manager gives elusive and substantial assets, which
prompts top notch trade connections (Liden et al., 1997).

Paradoxically, close oversight of subordinates and the hierarchy of leadership and rouse
subordinates utilizing outward rewards are stressed by Theory X directors (McGregor, 1960,
1966; McGregor and Cutcher-Gershenfeld, 2006). There exists a social-passionate separation
between their director and subordinates when the subordinates are administered by Theory X
chiefs and this prompts formal, indifferent and low-quality trade connections (Graen and Uhl-
Bien, 1995; Liden et al., 1997). As noted, the two written works have managed chief subordinate
connections. Additionally, the connection between the between the Theory X and Y the
executives styles and LMX are called for additional examination. In this manner, when,
conjointly inspected, the two literary works portrays a connection between the Theory X and Y
the executives styles and LMX is normal (Kopelman et al., 2008). Expectedly, when the
subordinates are directed by administrators with Theory Y perspectives ought to be required to
encounter higher caliber LMX connections.

Outer Rewards
Hypothesis X clarifies the significance of increased outside remunerations. So outer prize
framework is a quality of approach of chiefs and organization with hypothesis X. The efficiency
coming about because of representative execution is of the considerable number of workers
carrying out the responsibility is known as worker execution.

Worker execution is the general profitability of the considerable number of representatives and
the yield as a result of worker improvement (Sultana et al, 2012). It was expressed by Luthans
that there exists two sorts of remuneration framework which are money related (outward) and
nonfinancial (natural) reward. The two of which are utilized to upgrade representative execution
when used decidedly. Lotta (2006) concur that money related impetus decidedly influences to
inspire representative and have critical impact on worker execution.

Execution reward, work advancement, commission, tips, and endowments are remembered for
monetary prize. Extraneous prizes are outside to the activity and includes components like
incidental advantages, pay, advancements, the social atmosphere, private office space, and
professional stability. Different motivating forces incorporates serious pay rates, merit rewards,
increases in salary, and circuitous installment shapes as compensatory downtime (Mahaney and
Lederer, 2006; Mottaz, 1985).

Utilization of Extrinsic prizes are huge in indicating that the firm is not kidding about esteeming
bunch commitments to quality. There are subgroups made in such manner which utilizes
monetary awards in which money as reward paid to colleagues is incorporated. The reward is a
different motivating force from the pay and pay. Group rewards, then again ought to be given so
that administrators can abstain from decimating staffs inborn inspiration in carrying out their
responsibilities.

To be sure, the use of outward rewards can show the individuals to get eager to cash and to
pulverize their natural enthusiasm for the activity (Balkin and Dolan, 1997)as they are firmly
identified with group's presentation. Annuity, health advantages, representative help strategy, for
example, lunch and transport and so forth are remembered for incidental advantages. While
advantages, for example, retirement plans and protection arrangements are a piece of long haul
benefits. It is realized that outward rewards drive laborer's spirit.

These prizes when conveyed has consistently brought about huge loom in organizations,
particularly as per execution assessments in present globalization times (Appelbaum et al., 2011;
Datta, 2012). It is consistently fundamental to association's strategy to give compensations as it
has been appeared to improve laborers' presentation and the association's profitability. Outside
remunerations likewise incorporate to the endeavors and performed undertakings regarding
compensation/pay, advancements, rewards, employer stability, impetuses, and so on.

By and large, the exceptionally included specialists who are situated more to their occupations
are more disposed on characteristic than outward rewards (Wood, 1974). Moreover, an
immediate connection is known to exist between outward rewards and the inspiration of workers.
Notwithstanding, very little spending plan on budgetary prizes are spent by organizations.
(Hafiza et al., 2011).

Punishments

Hypothesis X clarifies the significance of elevated direct management alongside executing

punishments and disciplines as a restorative measure for profitability. Discipline can bring
efficiency for present moment however on the since quite a while ago run its damage exceeds its
advantages. Unsatisfactory disciplines bring about negative impact on the utilize and in the long
run harm the business. Discipline may not cause threatening vibe from a worker, yet he may
fight back by hurting the business. It was an all out misfortune circumstance for the business
over the long haul. It very well may be noticed that occasionally a rebuffed worker can conceal
his conduct in view of dread of extra discipline. It may cause tension and harm their spirit and
inspiration. Discipline upsets the workplace. An utilized can't coercively extricate thoughts and
developments from workers. Just positive work practices are urging to the representative. As it is
accepted by hypothesis X chiefs that representatives' work depends on their own personal
responsibility, they work thusly and are bound to utilize prizes or disciplines as inspiration.
A successive danger of discipline regularly bring about the worker pull separated as opposed to
remaining together so as to abstain from standing apart to turn into an objective once more. For
rebuffed workers, cooperation gets nonexistent as the representatives begin abstaining from
helping one another and open themselves to the executives. This damages their assurance and
generally speaking creation and effectiveness influencing relational aptitudes and innovativeness.

According to McGregor, the hypothesis X can be actualized in two restricting habits: the hard
methodology and the delicate methodology. Discipline as a restorative measure goes under the
hard methodology (alongside terrorizing and close examination). A threatening and ineffective
workforce can be an outcome of this methodology that may cause hatred towards the executives.
On the other and, tolerance and less severe standards are normal for delicate methodology. Be
that as it may, a framework, too delicate could bring about a low-yield workforce. As indicated
by McGregor, a productive certifiable use of the two parts of the bargains are too extraordinary
and a moderate methodology would be the best usage of Theory X.
References

Ajila, C and Abiola, A. (2004). Influence of Rewards on Workers Performance in an

Organization. Journal of Social Science, 8(1), pp.7-12.

Allio. R J (2009).Strategy & Leadership, Vol. 37, No. 2, pp.4-12.

Amin M., Wan K.W., (2014).The impact of human resource management practices on
performance evidence from a public university. Vol 26. pp 125-142.

Angulanna, E. G and Awujo, A. C. (2005). Human resource management: A graphic approach.

Owerri; Career publishers.

Bobic, M.P. & Davis W.E. (2003). A kind word of theory X and Theory Y. Journal of Public
Administration Research and Theory. Vol 13 (3). PP. 239-264.

Carraher, R, Gibson, A. & Buckley R (2006).Compensation in the Baltic and the USA.Baltic.

Journal of Management. Vol. 1, pp. 7-23.

DeCenzo, David A., and Stephen P. Robbins(2006). Fundamentals of Human Resource

Management. 9th ed. New York: Wiley.

Johns and Saks, M. (2008). Organizational Behavior : Understanding and Managing Life at
work, 7th Edition. Canada: Pearson Inc

Jansson, M., & Linton, S. J. (2006). Psychosocial work stressors in the development and
maintenance of insomnia: A prospective study. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 11,
241–248.
Kang, J., (2010): Ethical conflict and job satisfaction of public relations practitioners.Public
Relations Review. Vol. 36, pp. 152-156.

Karimi, L. (2008). A study of a multidimensional model of work-family conflict among Iranian

employees. Community, Work and Family.11, 283–296.

Stout, J. K. (1984). Supervisors' structuring and consideration behaviors and workers' job
satisfaction, stress, and health problems. Rehabilitation Bulletin, 28, 133–138.

Newsstrom, J.&Davis(2002).Organizational behavior: Human behavior at work .(11 th ed.)New

Dehli: Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing Company.

McGregor, D. (1960). The human side of enterprise. New York:McGraw-Hill.

Tim Hindle (2003).Guide to Management Ideas and Gurus.The Economist.