You make your overall point well, particularly in the context of the McStudly couple dynamics. But it doesn’t quite transfer to the employee/employer relationship. I agree there’s always a class of employees who just want to be told what to do and uninterested in the reason. But as an employer I also know there’s a class who need to understand the reasons and be somewhat convinced before giving it their best. You also need to allow this better class some flexibility to adapt to changing circumstances whilst still sticking to the overall principles of what you want, and they can’t do that without understanding your reasoning. Even for the class who don’t think much and happy to follow orders, they’ll still generally execute them better if they believe in what they’re doing. You don’t get buy-in just by issuing orders.
There is a theory on this... Something like X workers vs Y workers. 90% of workers don't want to think and just execute, but the top performing 10% that are likely critical to the success of the company, value autonomy and *need* to understand the "Why". Whenever you fail to provide the "Why", those workers disengage and behave like X workers.
How do I know? I work for a large company and prefer autonomy, but I'm usually just provided mindless rules and bureaucratic procedures. That prompts resentment and under-performance from me.
I'm not sure if this worker model varies by gender. I believe the study was done long ago (1950s) and was based on a mostly male sample. I suspect that most women are rule followers and don't care about the "Why", making them X workers.
We both know because as employees we need or needed to know the why. Now I’m an employer, I know the best people to employ are those who need to know the why. A common mistake I used to make though is that I projected my mindset onto most others. I still need to keep reminding myself we’re a minority.
You make your overall point well, particularly in the context of the McStudly couple dynamics. But it doesn’t quite transfer to the employee/employer relationship. I agree there’s always a class of employees who just want to be told what to do and uninterested in the reason. But as an employer I also know there’s a class who need to understand the reasons and be somewhat convinced before giving it their best. You also need to allow this better class some flexibility to adapt to changing circumstances whilst still sticking to the overall principles of what you want, and they can’t do that without understanding your reasoning. Even for the class who don’t think much and happy to follow orders, they’ll still generally execute them better if they believe in what they’re doing. You don’t get buy-in just by issuing orders.
There is a theory on this... Something like X workers vs Y workers. 90% of workers don't want to think and just execute, but the top performing 10% that are likely critical to the success of the company, value autonomy and *need* to understand the "Why". Whenever you fail to provide the "Why", those workers disengage and behave like X workers.
How do I know? I work for a large company and prefer autonomy, but I'm usually just provided mindless rules and bureaucratic procedures. That prompts resentment and under-performance from me.
I'm not sure if this worker model varies by gender. I believe the study was done long ago (1950s) and was based on a mostly male sample. I suspect that most women are rule followers and don't care about the "Why", making them X workers.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_X_and_Theory_Y#:~:text=Theory%20X%20explains%20the%20importance,approach%20tasks%20without%20direct%20supervision
We both know because as employees we need or needed to know the why. Now I’m an employer, I know the best people to employ are those who need to know the why. A common mistake I used to make though is that I projected my mindset onto most others. I still need to keep reminding myself we’re a minority.
Something I had come to on my own already, but you revealed other layers of it.
Jesus that is frame
Excellent.