Running Head: Argyris’s Immaturity-Maturity Theory 1

Argyris’s Immaturity-Maturity Theory

James Boyd, Darian Brisco, Timothy Hollis, Jason Siewert

Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management/Southwestern College

Marci Johnson

January 20, 2013

Argyris’s Immaturity-Maturity Theory 2

Abstract

This paper is an examination of Argyris’s Immaturity-Maturity Theory, which has become a

widely accepted strategy for motivating and managing human resources. It looks at he

importance of the process of integrating the individual into the organization. It delves into

defensive routines, the need for managerial action to bring about positive change, and the

dangers of managerial inaction or silence as well as single-loop and double-loop learning

models, the executive mind, and communication that blocks learning. Further, it looks at

similarities between Argyris’s theory and McGregor’s Theory X and Theory Y.

Argyris’s Immaturity-Maturity Theory 3

Chris Argyris is a business theorist and Professor Emeritus at Harvard Business School.

The 89-year-old began writing about business since 1951 and has continually forced leaders and

managers to reassess how they deal with subordinates with his insights into human behavior. He

has said that his main motivation for beginning to study group dynamics in the workplace was

that there was an extreme lack of actionable information available on the subject. Argyris took

on the challenge of providing such information and developed his own theory. His Immaturity-

Maturity Theory has become a widely accepted strategy for motivating and managing human

resources. Defensive routines, the need for managerial action to bring about positive change,

and the dangers of managerial inaction or silence are all major concerns for Argyris. His single-

loop and double-loop learning models take us beyond the importance of feedback and allow us to

get to the root of problems. According to Caulkin (1997), “The gently-spoken optimist has a

robust message: if managers do not like their environment, they should blame themselves”

(p.58).

Integrating the Individual and the Organization

Immaturity-Maturity Theory is a way of thinking that focuses on individuals. This focus

has been the subject of extensive debate over the years, but there is evidence that the theory

works in practice when understood and accepted by the individual and organization involved. To

explain further the idea I am espousing, it will be necessary to enlist the words of others. In a

study that explored the relationship between self-integration, self-complexity, and integrative

learning, Akrivou (2008) posits that “a focus of informal relational processes of professional

development in organizations on increasing the adults ability for self-integration, via an increase

in self-complexity and integrative learning can have beneficial effects on the ability of the person

to deal with the complexity, stress, pace and unpredictability involved in today’s working

Argyris’s Immaturity-Maturity Theory 4

environments - and not block further continuous learning and professional growth” (pp. 166-

167). She went on to cite Argyris’s work from both the 1960s and the 1990s on individual-

focused management and the built-in defenses of individuals. As you can see from the

terminology used by Akrivou, Argyris has been a major influence on her thinking in the area of

human resource management.

Argyris has repeatedly advocated for allowing individuals within an organization to

mature within the organizational structure. This means moving people from the left side of

Argyris’s Immaturity-Maturity Continuum (Table 1, below) to the right through effective

management techniques that increase excitement and challenges them. This will be delved into

more fully in the following sections. Suffice it to say, the goal here is to help make the

individual an integral part of the organization and not just a chair-filler.

Table 1

Argyris’s Immaturity-Maturity Continuum

Immaturity----------------------------------------Maturity

Passive__________________________________________________________________Active

Dependent__________________________________________________________Independent

Behave in a few ways________________________________Capable of behaving in many ways

Erratic shallow interest___________________________________Deeper and stronger interests

Short-time perspective____________________________Long-time perspective (past and future)

Subordinate position____________________________________Equal or superordinate position

Lack of awareness of self_______________________________Awareness and control over self

Immaturity/Maturity Motivation Theory

Argyris’s Immaturity-Maturity Theory 5

Theory X is still a common practice among companies. Many people are treated as

immature people by their coworkers and superiors. Chris Argyris' Immaturity/Maturity

Motivation Theory examines the transition and growth we make in the work environment.

According to Argyris, bureaucratic or pyramidal values (much like Theory X assumptions) lead

to shallow, mistrustful relationships. (Hersey, Blanchard & Johnson, 2013) Argyris found that

when people enter into a work environment, they are treated with distrust and are encouraged to

remain passive, dependent, and subordinate, thus perpetuating the cycle of immaturity.

According to Argyris, seven changes should take place in the personality of individuals if they are to develop into mature people over the years.

First, individuals move from a passive state as infants to a state of increasing activity as an adults.

Second, individuals develop from a state of dependency upon others as infants to a state of relative independence as adults.

Third, individuals behave in only a few ways as infants, but as adults they are capable of behaving in many ways.

Fourth, individuals have erratic, casual, and shallow interests as infants but develop deeper and stronger interests as adults.

Fifth, the time perspective of children is very short, involving only the present, but as they mature, their time perspective increases to include past and future.

Sixth, individuals as infants are subordinate to everyone, but they move to equal or superior positions with others as adults.

Seventh, as children, individuals lack an awareness of a “self,” but as adults they are not only aware of, but they are able to control “self.”

(Accel-Team, 2013)

These changes operate on the premise that we as people move from immaturity to

maturity. The successful leader seeks to empower their employees when following this

theory.

The difficulty most businesses have in breaking this cycle of suppression is that the

very nature of the work done by businesses is team oriented and this tends to suppress the

maturity level of its employees. It's often that the very things that a company wants from

Argyris’s Immaturity-Maturity Theory 6

their employees, is stifled by the traditional process and mission and vision that their

employees must work to carry out, and as a result, can cost innovation, creativity, and

motivation. Leadership must recognize these suppressions and work to motivate,

empower, and inspire their employees.

Single Loop/Double Loop Learning

Argyris studied the way we learn, or respond to error and correction. He describes two

different learning processes; single-loop learning, and double-loop learning. These two are

described below:

When the error detected and corrected permits the organization to carry on its present

policies or achieve its presents objectives, then that error-and-correction process is single-

loop learning. Single-loop learning is like a thermostat that learns when it is too hot or too cold

and turns the heat on or off. The thermostat can perform this task because it can receive

information (the temperature of the room) and take corrective action. Double-looplearning

occurs when error is detected and corrected in ways that involve the modification of an

organization’s underlying norms, policies and objectives. (Smith, 2001)

Single-loop learning is essentially a focus of the task itself and how to solve problems. It

takes into account the parameters, and then seeks alternate routes within those parameters. It a

lot like GPS directions. There is a point A and a point B. There are many ways to get there, but

the overall idea remains the same; point A to point B. In the business world, this happens often

in the efficiency process. The goal to make things more efficient never changes, only the

methods by which a company seeks to accomplish it. This type of learning affords the least

amount of risk to both the individual and the company. There seems to be a universal human

tendency to design one’s actions consistently according to four basic values:

Argyris’s Immaturity-Maturity Theory 7

1. To remain in unilateral control;

2. To maximize ‘‘winning’’ and minimize ‘‘losing’’;

3. To suppress negative feelings; and

4. To be as ‘‘rational’’ as possible—by which people mean defining clear objectives and

evaluating their behavior in terms of whether or not they have achieved them.

(Argyris, 1991) Argyris also referred to this as a closed loop, or doom loop.

Double-loop learning contrasts single-loop in that it attempts to solve errors by looking at

the parameters that the task must follow. An alternative response is to question to governing

variables themselves, to subject them to critical scrutiny. This they describe as double-loop

learning. Such learning may then lead to an alteration in the governing variables and, thus, a

shift in the way in which strategies and consequences are framed. (Smith, 2001) Looking at the

same example used for single-loop, the GPS directions, using double-loop learning would be like

pulling out a map if the GPS didn't get you to point B, or deciding that point B isn't all that

important and going somewhere else. Making this decision has completely different

consequences and in essence changes not only the consequences themselves, but also the way

that the problem is approached and can be approached in the future.

Argyris and McGregor

As discussed earlier, there are some similarities and even overlaps apparent between

McGregor’s Theory X and Theory Y and Argyris’s Immaturity-Maturity Theory. Theory X and

its task-oriented behavior can lead to distrust in the workplace and Theory Y or relationship

building where trusting relationships develop among people (Hersey, et al. 2013; Morrison,

2008) are echoed in many of Argyris’s writings. Argyris displays great concern for the

Argyris’s Immaturity-Maturity Theory 8

shallowness of the relationships that develop under pyramidal power structures because of their

tendencies toward creating leaders with low interpersonal competence. The alternative he

promotes is a more democratic working environment where “both organizational members and

the organization itself are given an opportunity to develop to the fullest potential” (Hersey, et

al. 2013).

Clearly, in the absence of his own theory, Argyris would be an

advocate of Theory Y rather than Theory X. He continually advocates two-

way communication opposed to the barking of orders that goes hand-in-hand

with Theory X. Argyris does not believe that people have to and want to be

closely controlled, that they all hate work, and that they have no ambition as

is stated in Theory X. Most importantly, he does believe that motivation can

occur at any level and that it is the responsibility of the manager or leader to

provide that motivation.

The Learning Process

The learning process or the leadership style encompasses learning at the individual level

to begin with, followed closely by a group which will include but not limited to peers, and finally

management. There are at least two ways to correct errors from each of the groups. One is to

change the behavior (for example, reduce backbiting and bad-mouthing among individuals).

This kind of correction requires only single-loop learning. The second way to correct errors is to

change the underlying programmed or master programmer that leads individuals to bad-mouth

others even when they say they do not intend to do so. (Argyris, 1995) If you can alter the

situation of the follower by cutting out of the malice types of behavior they are portraying and

therefore improving the overall well-being of the person, you have just used a single-loop type of

Argyris’s Immaturity-Maturity Theory 9

learning and the issues are resolved. When you must do what I like to call deprogramming of an

individual, that is to say wipe the slate of the mind clean from previous learned or taught

behavior and start educating/programming the person to the type and style of appropriate

behavior that is acceptable in the workplace. This type of learning is referred to as double-loop

learning style.

Each theory of learning by the individual can stem back to their early days of when the

beliefs and values formed when put together by their surroundings and things they saw and

interacted with. You must also factor in the education level and the prosperity level as each play

a large role in the developing and or changing of one new way of thinking.

You start the process by making sure they understand you position and the power you hold by

being in that position to facilitate the change require of the employee. Evaluation of thoughts

and actions takes place of all people involved to include the manger. Once this is completed,

you can then contribute all actions that are causing issues and then they can be addressed.

Theory in Action

Espoused and Theory-in-action is the result of the collaborative research of Argyris and

Schön. They postulated that human beings are idealistic and have a sense of right and wrong.

They have a preconceived idea of the goodness they are capable of and this is what they called

the espoused theory.(Tang, 2006) In this theory, each person remains in total control, must

achieve the best of the best in winning and at all cost if one must lose, it will be the smallest

amount possible. Negative thoughts and feeling are pushed down to the lowest point as to not

even exist which given the person an even greater chance of success. The last but certainly not

the least, the logical behind each scripted thought in this theory will be the utmost logical to

propel the individual to success.

Argyris’s Immaturity-Maturity Theory 10

Action science is about understanding and producing action. Action, regardless of how

large and complex or small and simple, requires the execution of a solution, production of the

invention in the everyday life in which the problem is discovered, and evaluating the

effectiveness of the production. (Argyris, 1995) These are exciting theories and we need to

understand them from the Christian perspective so as to discover how useful they can be in

spiritual formation (Tang, 2006). When you add the Christian teaching of Jesus Christ at the

logical business way you can’t have any greater source of strength to assist you to achieve

anything in life.

Communication that blocks learning

The growth of a corporation is based on the work of the employees. Understanding their

technical skills are important but Chris Argyris studies tend to focus more on the behavior

exhibited in the workplace to further understand how employees are feeling to maximize full

potential. “Employees who’ve learned to take active responsibility for their own behavior,

develop and share first rate-information about their jobs, and make good use of genuine

empowerment to shape lasting solutions to fundamental problems.” (Argyris 1994) To do this

accurately, organizations would have to deter themselves from traditional surveys, walk-around-

management and focus groups. These techniques used resolve simple problems but neglect to

understand to the complex issues such as: productive change, perceptive behavior, and deeper

information. Traditional evaluation of effectiveness hinders the organizations view of work and

behavior. These evaluations disregard “…deep and potentially threatening or embarrassing

information that can motivate learning and produce real change.”(Argyris 1994)

The understanding of communication can be beneficial to an organizations’ success if the

right questions are asked. As stated, traditional concepts of measuring employee satisfaction can

Argyris’s Immaturity-Maturity Theory 11

inhibit the communication the company really needs to sustain a productive working

environment. Evaluating how employees feel about their work, understanding the level of

technical skills and how organizational morale provides insightful information that companies

can better used when implementing performance improvements.

In the article, Good Communication That Blocks Learning, Chris Argyris (1994)

provided an example of how communication is effective in the workplace. In the example, an

organization was called in to help another organization reduce cost. The organization that was

being assisted understood the nine problem areas but was not sure how to communicate

resolutions. As a defensive strategy, the executives passed the responsibility to one another and

no resolution was ever reached. With the assistance of Chris Argyris and his firm, they were able

identify, ask the appropriate question and provided resolutions.

Therefore, communication is essential to the effectiveness of an organization. It provides

more in-depth information about the behavior or the employees and how process improvement

can be better evaluated.

Defining Executive Mind and Double-Loop Learning

From an organization standpoint, we have to consider the communication between

managers and subordinates. Chris Argrysis (1982) defines executive mind as “the way

executives create premises, make inferences, and arrive at conclusions.” It seems to be a normal

way of thinking but it may cause issues when executives use this to their advantage, as opposed

to the betterment of their team. When there is power of management, manipulating certain

situations can also block communication. Chris Argrysis (1982) talks about these in his studies

and refers to it as double-loop learning. An idea that executives don’t like to be questioned for

their work practices and have a hard time accepting criticism hiders the necessary

Argyris’s Immaturity-Maturity Theory 12

communication. Bringing embarrassment to the executive for incompetence is often protected in

the interest of the executive.

Double loop learning tends to provide more pushback on the questioner. Chris Argyris

(1994) considers this to be a contradictory way of learning because questioning the executives

behavior seems is threatening and embarrassing. “Because double loop learning depends on

questioning one’s own assumptions and behavior, this apparently benevolent strategy is actually

antilearning”. (Argyris 1994) To avoid this notion of learning, executives develop defensive

strategies, espoused theory and theory-in-use, to help cope with push-back. Espoused theory is

handling threatening problems with an inconsistent behavior. Example used in the article, The

Executive Mind and Double-Loop Learning, is referred to a phrase that is often stated: “Do as I

say, not as I do”. Theory-in-use is a concept that is commonly used when dealing with stress.

This theory states that we are consistently inconsistent in our actions. Espoused theories and

theory-in-use have the same characteristics: “controlling, maximizing winning and minimizing

losing, suppressing negative feelings, and to as be rational as possible, by which we mean laying

out clear-cut goals and then evaluating our own behavior on the basis of whether or not we’ve

achieved them.” (Argyris, 1994)

The importance of organizational learning, maturity-theory, is necessary for organization

success. Vivian Robinson (2001), describes this learning occurring when an organization

experiences problematic issues and inquire it into the organizations behalf. We have evaluated

the effectiveness of communication from an organizations standpoint and defined how pride

behavior can manipulate the communication between subordinate and executive. When there is a

lack of genuine behavior, organizations are not able to produce, as they need to.

Argyris’s Immaturity-Maturity Theory 13

Summary

This paper has been an examination of Argyris’s Immaturity-Maturity Theory. It cover

the widely acceptance of it as a strategy for motivating and managing human resources. It

factored in the importance of the process of integrating the individual into the organization. It

includes analysis of defensive routines, the need for managerial action to bring about positive

change, and the dangers of managerial inaction or silence as well as single-loop and double-loop

learning models, the executive mind, and communication that blocks learning. Further, it

scrutinized the similarities between Argyris’s theory and McGregor’s Theory X and Theory Y.

Argyris’s Immaturity-Maturity Theory 14

References

Accel-Team. (2013). Chris argyris immaturity / maturity motivation theory. Retrieved from

http://www.accel-team.com/human_relations/hrels_06ii_argyris.html

Akrivou, K. (2008). Differentiation and integration in adult development: the influence of self

complexity and integrative learning on self integration. (Doctoral dissertation), Available

from ProQuest Central. (UMI Number: 3313084) Retrieved from

http://140.234.1.9:8080/EPSessionID=1069528f4028f2273457fd6c1f502c4a/

EPHost=search.proquest.com/EPPath/pqcentral/docview/304666865/fulltextPDF?

accountid=13979

Argyris, C. (1995). Chris Argyris: Action science and organizational learning. Retrieved from

http://ptarpp2.uitm.edu.my/silibus/actsc.pdf

Agyris, C. (1994). Good communication that blocks learning. Harvard business review.

Retrieved from http://www.columbia.edu/itc/hs/pubhealth/isett/Session%2008/Argyris

%201994%20COMMUNICATION.pdf

Argyris, C. (1991). Teaching smart people how to learn. Harvard business review, 4(2),

Retrieved from http://pds8.egloos.com/pds/200805/20/87/chris_argyris_learning.pdf

Argyris, C. (1982). The executive mind and double-loop learning. Organizational dynamics,

11(2), 5-22. Retrieved from

http://www.monitor.com/MENA/Portals/0/MonitorContent/imported/MonitorUnitedState

s/Articles/PDFs/Monitor_Organizational_Dynamics.pdf

Caulkin, S. (1997). Chris Argyris. Management Today, October 1997, 58-59. Retrieved from

http://ezproxy.sckans.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/214771189?

accountid=13979

Argyris’s Immaturity-Maturity Theory 15

Hersey, P., Blanchard, K., & Johnson, D. (2013).Management of organizational behavior:

Leading human resources. (10th ed., pp. 7-9). Boston: Pearson Education Inc., publishing

as Prentice Hall.

Morrison, J. L. (2008). Management of organizational behavior. Journal of Education for

Business,83(3), 181-182. Retrieved from

http://140.234.1.9:8080/EPSessionID=eaa3df78fffb3cd07328f4d61a96c178/

EPHost=search.proquest.com/EPPath/pqcentral/docview/202821299/fulltextPDF?

accountid=13979

Smith, M. (2001). Chris Argyris, double-loop learningand organizational learning @ the

encyclopedia of informal education. Retrieved from

http://www.infed.org/thinkers/argyris.htm

Tang, Alex (2006), Learning Theories of Chris Argyris and Donald Schön. Retrieved from

http://www.kairos2.com/agryris_schon.htm

Viviane M.J. Robinson. (2001). Descriptive and normative research on organizational learning:

Locating the contribution of argysis and schon. The International Journal of Educational

Management, 15(2), 58-58+. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.skcans.edu