Douglas McGregor developed his Theory X and Theory Y in the 1960s and they’ve been a staple of management thought ever since. Just to review, Theory X postulates that people are lazy, dislike work, and will avoid it if they can. Theory Y, by contrast, suggests that people may, in fact, enjoy their work and pitch in willingly where needed.
McGregor’s famous theories demonstrate how managers with different assumptions handle people in their everyday work. They don’t address talent development, but I can suggest two theories that might be in use there.
I’ll call the first one, Theory P. The “P” stands for “Parts.” People who follow this theory consider people as parts, mostly interchangeable and easy to describe in a spec sheet. This is not a politically correct theory, since every corporation with a charter asserts that “people are our most important asset” Even so, Theory P is clearly what Chris Argyris called the “theory in use” in many organizations.
There’s no other way to explain ideas like using supply chain techniques for talent management as Peter Cappelli has done. Quick-trigger layoff policies assume that the knowledge people have in their heads and the relationships they develop are easily replaceable.
How about Theory H? The “H” is for “Human,” you know actual people with a life they bring to work. People, who develop knowledge and relationships that are the source of corporate sustainable competitive advantage. Theory H says that you manage them like people with all their messiness, imperfections, and wonder.
People as parts may have seemed perfect for the Industrial Age, but people as human beings is the only choice that makes sense in a Knowledge Economy.
