motivational analysis of organizations

teams, tries to be objective in providing rewards and punishments, and participates in
discussions.
When Lippitt and White compared these two styles of management in their
experimental studies, they found that authoritarians produced (a) a greater quantity of
work, (b) a greater amount of aggressiveness toward the leader, (c) less originality in
work, (d) less work motivation, (e) more dependence, (f) less group feeling, and (g)
more suppressed discontent.
Task-Oriented and Employee-Oriented Styles
Blake and Mouton (1964) developed the concept of task-oriented and people-oriented
leadership. The following paragraphs explain the differences between these supervisory
styles.
Task-Oriented Supervisor. A task-oriented supervisor emphasizes the task, often
believes that ends are more important than means, and thinks that employees need to be
supervised closely in order to accomplish their tasks. This type of supervisor becomes
upset when tasks are not accomplished. The concern for task is so high that the human
aspect is likely to be neglected in dealings with subordinates. This type of supervisor is
likely to have difficulty in human relations and may appear to be a “tough” person. A
task-oriented supervisor may frequently question or remind subordinates about their
tasks, warn them about deadlines, or show a great deal of concern about details.
Employees who work with an excessively task-oriented supervisor often develop
negative attitudes about their work and their supervisor. They may be motivated only by
fear and may feel job dissatisfaction. They may develop shortcuts that, in the long run,
affect the organization’s performance.
Employee-Oriented Supervisor. In contrast, the employee-oriented supervisor
believes that a concern for subordinates’ needs and welfare promotes both the quality
and quantity of work. This concern may be reflected in attempts to keep subordinates in
good humor and in frequent inquiries about their problems (even those unrelated to
work). In the extreme, this type of supervision also leads to inefficiency. Subordinates
may perceive this type of supervisor as too lenient and may take advantage of the
supervisor’s concern.
The task-oriented and employee-oriented styles may not be present in pure forms,
and one manager may demonstrate combinations of the two styles. The effectiveness of
the styles also may depend on factors such as the nature of the task or the nature of the
subordinate.
Subsequent work by Fiedler (1967) indicated that the effectiveness of task-oriented
or people-oriented styles is contingent on situational factors such as the power of the
leader, acceptance of the supervisor by subordinates, and the way in which the tasks are
structured.
The Pfeiffer Library Volume 19, 2nd Edition. Copyright © 1998 Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer ❚❘ 165