Skip to Main Content
2
Views
0
CrossRef citations
Altmetric

III. Special Fields Applications

A Response to Horton's “Framework for a Theory of TA and Organizational Development”

Pages 249-250
Published online: 28 Dec 2017
 
Translator disclaimer

In our article, we critique Horton's Framework for a Theory of TA and Organizational Development. Horton stated in the July, 1976, TAJ, that McGregor's Theory X is viewed as a constant Parent, Theory Y as a constant Child, and Theory Z as a constant Adult. We agree that Theory X represents a constant Parent approach to managing. But we strongly disagree that Theory Y represents a constant Child. We feel that Mr. Horton, like many others, misunderstands the essence of Theory Y. An understanding of McGregor's concepts reveals Theory Z to be an unnecessary duplication since Theory Y is also a dynamic approach to managing, and suggests that managers use appropriate ego states to manage those in organizations. Thus, under Theory Y, the adult becomes the executive of the manager's personality.

Additional information

Author information

Maurice F. Villere

Maurice F. Villere, PhD, RM, is an associate professor of management at the University of New Orleans. He has conducted numerous workshops on transactional analysis for practicing managers.

M. Michael Le Boeuf

M. Michael LeBoeuf, PhD, is an associate professor of management at the University of New Orleans. He has conducted numerous seminars on the topics of management by objective and time management.