McDonald’s is currently the largest food chain operating around the world, founded in 1954. The company has a presence in 117 countries, operating through 35,000 outlets. It is believed that McDonald’s serves up to 68 million customers annually. It is important to note that each McDonald’s outlet is either run by the company or as a franchise. In the US, 35% are run by the company while the rest are franchises working under the company name. As a result, the company is now the second largest private employer with a workforce of more than 1.9 million employees. In 2012, the company reported profits of up to $5.5 billion. Over the years the company has developed systems within the organization that support the attainment of the organization goals (Toivanen & Waterson, 2011). However, the company is still plagued by a number of organization behavior problems such as the lack of motivation among the staff, and the use of poor leadership styles. Thus, this paper will seek to identify the cause of McDonald’s organization behavior problems and to provide probable solutions.
Motivation
The main goal of organization behavior includes controlling and developing human activity at work. In order to achieve this aim, organizations have to keep their personnel motivated. Motivation has been proven to increase the productivity of workers by a large margin (Furnham, 2005). The most crucial asset of a business is the human resource. It is important for an association to have its personnel dedicated and always motivated to reach organization objectives (Greenberg, 2012). One of the issues that McDonald’s countenances with workers are the base wages they get. Because of the low pay, with time, numerous workers feel like they are not being sufficiently remunerated for the work they put into their jobs. Some of them call the job “McJob”. Numerous reviews from former workers show that they don’t believe they had to work as hard as they did, for the pay they received. All things considered, it is clear that this is causing a lack of motivation, which causes workers to be sluggish; most workers don’t work as productively as they could (Janos, 2015).
McDonald’s is considered to have among the least motivated workers as opposed to other fast food chains. Some of the employee reviews expressed that the most noticeably disliked job as a worker in McDonald’s is dish washing duty. Managers set preposterous time constraints to get the dishes washed and workers feel pressured to accomplish it on time. This sort of pressure does not take after a motivational objective setting theory because of the pressure, the non-acceptance and commitment by workers to the objective. In view of the current workplace environment, numerous workers don’t feel motivated and are not as productive as they should be. It is important to note that a large number of their representatives are less than 21 years old years old, and they don’t react well to such a set up (Toivanen & Waterson, 2011).
Additionally, one of the reasons that McDonald’s workers are not profoundly motivated is on account that a large portion of their personnel has to hold more than one job at a time due to the low wages (Janos, 2015). What managers are neglecting to see or are disregarding deliberately, is that the best approach to motivate these basically youthful laborers who get the lowest pay permitted by law, is through giving them a workplace where they are motivated to be very productive.
Herzberg Motivation-Hygiene Theory
With an end goal to better comprehend the factors which motivated employees, Frederick Herzberg performed in-depth interviews with workers looking to figure out which parts of their employment they preferred, and which displeased them. Herzberg concluded that one set of factors caused job satisfaction, while another set caused dissatisfaction. Thus, the lack of specific factors would demotivate workers in the workplace; however, providing these factors past a certain level would not motivate the workers any further. Conversely, the absence of a few of these factors would not cause employee demotivation, albeit their presence increased motivation and productivity (Melter, Herzberg, Mausner, Snyderman, 1960).
McDonald’s only provides employees with a few perks that can motivate them to be more productive. Herzberg listed a number of factors that he concluded would suffice to motivate employees – called the ‘motivators’. In addition, he further listed other factors that would cause dissatisfaction among employees if they were absent – he referred to them as the ‘hygiene’ factors. The result of this research was the Motivation-Hygiene theory (Pegler, 2012). In the case of McDonald’s and other companies within the industry, Two Factor theory can be used to determine the type of factors that will motivate the employees.
According to Melter, Herzberg, Mausner, Snyderman (1960) the most important hygiene factors are:
- Employees’ salaries and wages.
- Quality of supervision by unit managers.
- Working conditions
- Relationship with peers in the workplace.
- Company policy and relationship with the boss.
McDonald’s satisfies just about only two factors in the list. The company policy is favorable for employees in terms of benefits for a majority of the top-level employees, and the relationship among workers is often very satisfactory. However, the company fails to satisfy a number of crucial hygiene factors. First, the working conditions are very unfavorable for the employees and the unit managers pressure the workers to perform instead of motivating them. Most importantly, the workers are constantly pushing for the company to raise the minimum wage to $15/hr. Conversely, this might be unsuitable approach to increasing workers motivation. The company can decide to use other motivators (Janos, 2015).
The crucial motivators according to Melter, Herzberg, Mausner, Snyderman (1960) include;
- Recognition
- Receiving some level of responsibility
- Growth potential
- The work itself
- Potential for achievement.
The company facilitates the development of their workers through training at their Hamburger University. Workers have the potential to advance their careers although this is a tedious process. Nevertheless, all workers need recognition. The company should recognize their most productive and motivated workers. They should launch programs that will recognize such workers’ efforts in a bid to ensure that they remain motivated (Furnham, 2005).
Corporate & Work Culture
It is important to analyze how an organization’s culture is maintained to understand their teamwork and leadership skills. McDonald’s is a multinational company with a very diverse workforce that requires proper leadership skills. A lack of proper leadership is bound to b reflected on the productivity of the company.
Leadership at McDonald’s
The McDonald’s workplace culture shows that they are very dependent on the specific line manager in control. In most of the cases the manager is relatively casual and even sometimes it is difficult discern them from alternate workers. The manager would not attempt to put any hard straight up barriers between their workers and themselves. Herzberg’s two-factor theory clarifies that great working conditions only go so far, and that workers need more satisfaction like inspiration and acknowledgment to give them satisfaction. However, in a less skill position less income is sufficient. Suffice it to say that the more motivated workers are the happier customers will be (Boje & Rhodes, 2006).
The methods used by the managers in getting staff to complete jobs on time bear qualities of McGregor’s theory X management style. Managers with such attitudes hold the belief that workers are demotivated, lazy, lack the incentive to work, and they often seek for opportunities to avoid working. The theory further points out that in order to make the workers more productive, managers have to closely supervise them (McGregor, 1960). Such managers, including unit managers at McDonald’s, tend to have a pessimistic expectation of his personnel, and use external means of exerting authority such as threats. Theory X is usually efficient where workers are only working to barely survive, albeit it is counterproductive in most cases. This lack of efficacy occurs due to the worker’s urge to satisfy esteem and social needs in the modern workplace set up (Gannon & Boguszak, 2013).
On the other hand, managers with Theory Y attitudes hold the assumptions that workers are always willing to work and aim to achieve maximum output (McGregor, 1960). Such type of management is usually unpopular in low paying jobs such as those offered by McDonald’s. This is the management style that McDonald’s should adopt in order to keep the employees more motivated and willing to work further with the organization. The unit managers should further promote a participative leadership style that makes use of internal rewards and motivation. This management attitude fosters the belief that workers place great value on working for the organization. It is important to note that workers who are supervised by managers with Theory Y attitudes have a higher level of commitment as opposed to those under Theory X managers (Gannon & Boguszak, 2013).
Situational Leadership Theory
The recent increase in globalization among countries has called for the need of a management system that will adapt with this unavoidable occurrence. The situational leadership theory is becoming progressively well-known in cutting edge authoritative leadership. This is clear from the way in which it is surfacing in scholarly writing, for example, books, diaries and exploration reports. A leadership style refers to the pattern of conduct; including both words and action as shown by a leader. Situational leadership rotates around employment related development. As per Thompson & Vecchio (2009), occupation development alludes to an individual’s capacity in performing a job and this is a key variable in deciding their behavior.
The situational leadership model puts it that viable leadership is reliant on both the demonstrations of management and leadership and that these upgrade an association’s match to current worldwide patterns. The model rose up out of the acknowledgment and comprehension that not all people within a job are similar in terms of maturity and that the requirement for a leadership style varies with circumstances. Therefore, the model is based on situational variables as it depends on everyday impression of a leader and additionally the natural perceptions as opposed to research information (Greenberg, 2012).
Situational leadership involves first comprehending one’s dominating leadership approach (e.g. Theory X and Theory Y) and the level of the follower in the development process. An increase in the minimum wage offered by McDonald’s is unsustainable in the long run and the only method that the company can use to overcome this is by substituting the utilitarian satisfaction that workers get from their wages with better management. Situational leadership is especially turning into a successful technique among Army leaders given the current level of combat techniques and technological advancement. Situational leadership is consequently exceptionally indispensable in the difficult the uncertain and complex nature of the current work environment (Graeff, 1997). Such leadership will ensure that the company is able to adequately react to any negative effects of a failure to increase wages due to economic constraints.
Path-goal theory
The performance of a workforce in an association is much dependent on the leadership they have. Leadership must be powerful and customized to the specific circumstance to guarantee that the ideal productivity is achieved. The path-goal theory of leadership, developed by Robert House in 1976, is a value-based leadership theory that clarifies how leadership ought to be completed in a way that draws out the best in the workers capacities and is reliant on the effectiveness, inspiration and fulfillment of the personnel in an association (Ratyan, Khalaf, & Rasli, 2013). The theory traces how leadership conduct and the workers capacities will follow a specific path that will accomplish the result – the goal. This goal would be a common goal of the employee and the association (Furnham, 2005). The theory proposed the ideology that the final performance of an organization can be determined by analyzing the path taken by the company. The managers working at McDonald’s can be led by such an ideology that prompts the use of appropriate strategies towards the achievement of organization goals.
Distinctive leadership styles are required, regarding leadership conduct, contingent upon the circumstances and demands of the specific situation (Greenberg, 2012). Analyzing the theory in more detail, this situational leadership theory clarifies how an individual’s state of mind and their conduct are influenced by the connection between their exertion and execution, the goal paths, and the allure of the rewards.
Conclusion
McDonald’s is the largest food chain in the world operating across 117 countries. The company is the second largest employer in the world with 1.9 million employees. Suffice it to say that McDonald’s is a very successful company, reporting profits of up to $12 billion in 2012. On the other hand, the company is faced by a growing lack of leadership and motivation among workers. Using the Herzberg Motivation-Hygiene Theory, it was determined that the company fails to provide certain hygiene factors and motivators (Furnham, 2005). These factors include adequate wages, leadership, and the opportunity for the workers to advance their careers. Furthermore, the lack of proper leadership in the company was explained and solutions provided using the Situational Leadership and path-goal theories. Additionally, the management of the company is bound to benefit from the adoption of McGregor’s Theory Y management attitudes as opposed to what is currently in place.
References
Boje, D., & Rhodes, C. (2006). The leadership of Ronald McDonald: Double narration and stylistic lines of transformation. The Leadership Quarterly, 17(1), 94-103. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2005.10.004
Furnham, A. (2005). The psychology of behaviour at work. Hove [England]: Psychology Press.
Gannon, D., & Boguszak, A. (2013). DOUGLAS MCGREGOR’S THEORY X AND THEORY Y.CRIS – Bulletin Of The Centre For Research And Interdisciplinary Study, 2013(2). doi:10.2478/cris-2013-0012
Graeff, C. L. (1997). Evolution of situational leadership theory: A critical review.The Leadership Quarterly, 8(2), 153-170.
Greenberg, J. (2012). Managing behavior in organizations (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Janos, A. (2015). Fast Food Minimum Wage Push Takes to the Streets of New York City. WSJ. Retrieved 17 April 2015, from http://blogs.wsj.com/metropolis/2015/04/15/fast-food-minimum-wage-push-takes-to-the-streets-of-new-york-city/
Meltzer, L., Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., & Snyderman, B. (1960). The Motivation to Work. Industrial And Labor Relations Review, 13(3), 470. doi:10.2307/2520337
McGregor, D. (1960). Theory X and theory Y. Organization theory, 358-374.
Pegler, C. (2012). Herzberg, hygiene and the motivation to reuse: Towards a three-factor theory to explain motivation to share and use OER. Journal Of Interactive Media In Education, 2012(1), 4. doi:10.5334/2012-04
Ratyan, A., Khalaf, B., & Rasli, A. (2013). Overview of Path-Goal Leadership Theory. Jurnal Teknologi, 64(2). doi:10.11113/jt.v64.2235
Thompson, G., & Vecchio, R. (2009). Situational leadership theory: A test of three versions. The Leadership Quarterly, 20(5), 837-848. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2009.06.014
Toivanen, O., & Waterson, M. (2011). Retail chain expansion. London: Centre for Economic Policy Research.
