Follett’s early insights about human psychology laid the foundation for understanding intrinsic motivation. Her recognition that people naturally seek meaningful contribution and collaborative achievement predated Abraham Maslow’s work by decades. McGregor’s Theory Y was explicitly rooted in motivation theory alongside the works of Maslow and emphasised that people are naturally motivated by challenging work, responsibility, and the opportunity for personal growth. Deming’s psychology component emphasised that people are naturally motivated by pride in workmanship, meaningful contribution, and continuous learning. Schein’s work on culture revealed how extrinsic rewards and punishments undermine the very behaviours they’re intended to encourage.

This understanding of natural human motivation found perhaps its most elegant expression in Marshall Rosenberg’s insight:

“Do nothing that is not play.”

~ Marshall Rosenberg

Rosenberg, founder of Nonviolent Communication, understood that when people connect with their deeper needs and values—when work becomes an expression of their authentic selves rather than external compliance—engagement becomes effortless and joyful. His perspective extends McGregor’s insight about work being “as natural as play” into the realm of conscious choice and intrinsic fulfillment, showing how organisations can create conditions where people bring their whole selves to their contributions without coercion or manipulation.

This insight also resonates deeply with Viktor Frankl’s logotherapy and his profound observation that “those who have a ‘why’ to live, can bear with almost any ‘how.'” Frankl’s work revealed that meaning—not pleasure or power or money—is the primary human drive. In organisational contexts, this translates to the understanding that people don’t just need autonomy and mastery; they need to see how their work connects to something larger than themselves. When organisations help people discover the deeper purpose in their contributions, even challenging work becomes sustainably energising rather than depleting.

Ray Immelman’s “Great Boss Dead Boss” masterfully illustrates this principle through its fictional narrative about transformational leadership. Through the story of Marcus, who inherits a struggling company and gradually learns to see his role as helping people connect with their deeper purpose rather than merely managing performance, Immelman demonstrates the real power of meaning-centered leadership. The book shows how when leaders focus on helping people discover why their work matters—both to themselves and to something larger—organisational excellence becomes inevitable rather than forced.

Defensive Routines as Learning Killers

Perhaps their most practical insight was identifying how organisations systematically defend against the very learning they claim to want. Follett understood how traditional “power over” approaches create resistance and compliance rather than engagement. McGregor showed how Theory X collective assumptions and beliefs become self-fulfilling prophecies that create the very behaviours they expect. Argyris documented how people avoid embarrassment and threat by making important issues “undiscussable,” creating organisational blind spots that persist despite obvious problems. These defensive patterns operate at a psychological level and require psychological interventions that challenge collective assumptions and beliefs to change. See also: SAR organisations.

The Methodology Revolution

These thinkers didn’t just theorise about psychology—they developed practical methods for working with human nature rather than against it:

Integration and Conflict Resolution: Follett pioneered the idea that conflict, rather than requiring compromise, could be a stimulus for innovation. Her integrative approach showed how differences could be resolved through creative solutions that satisfy all parties, laying the groundwork for modern collaborative problem-solving.

Theory Y Management Practices: McGregor’s work led to practical management approaches that emphasised participative decision-making, delegation of authority, and job enrichment—all designed to tap into people’s natural capacity for responsibility and growth.

Action Learning and Reflection: Schön’s concept of reflective practice and Argyris’s action science created structured ways to surface and examine the psychological assumptions driving behaviour. These approaches recognised that change requires ongoing psychological work, not just one-time training events.

Cultural Diagnosis: Schein developed methods for uncovering the unconscious assumptions that drive organisational behaviour. His process consulting approach emphasised psychological dynamics between consultant and client, recognising that how change happens is as important as what changes.

PDSA and Psychological Learning: Deming’s Plan-Do-Study-Act cycle wasn’t just about process improvement—it was a psychological learning method that built prediction, experimentation, and reflection into daily work. This approach honoured how humans naturally learn whilst creating systematic improvement. The contemporary Toyota Kata approach represents a powerful evolution of this insight, creating practice routines that develop people’s thinking patterns rather than just implementing solutions. Kata recognises that sustainable improvement comes from building psychological capability—the ability to see problems clearly, experiment thoughtfully, and learn from results—rather than from prescriptive processes or management directives.

Intervention Theory: Argyris and Schön created rigorous methods for designing interventions that account for psychological dynamics like threat, defensiveness, and face-saving. Their work showed that good intentions aren’t enough—change efforts must be psychologically sophisticated to succeed. John Seddon’s contemporary systems thinking approach – the Vanguard Method – extends this insight, demonstrating how command-and-control interventions create the very problems they’re designed to solve by triggering defensive routines and gaming behaviours that destroy performance.

The Great Divide: Psychology vs. Scientific Management

To fully appreciate the revolutionary nature of these psychology pioneers, we must understand what they were rebelling against: Frederick Winslow Taylor’s Scientific Management, which dominated organisational thinking for much of the 20th century, and even today.

Two Fundamentally Opposite Worldviews

Taylor’s Scientific Management (1880s-1920s) vs. the psychology-centred approaches described herein represent diametrically opposed philosophies about human nature and organisational effectiveness:

On Human Nature:

• Taylor: People are inherently lazy, avoid responsibility, and are motivated primarily by money. Workers need constant supervision and external control to perform.
• Psychology Pioneers: People naturally seek meaning, growth, and contribution. Under the right psychological conditions, work becomes as natural as play. These contrasting collective assumptions and beliefs about human nature create entirely different organisational realities.

On Knowledge and Expertise:

• Taylor: Managers and industrial engineers should study work scientifically to discover the “one best way.” Workers execute; managers think.
• Psychology Pioneers: Knowledge emerges from collaborative inquiry. Workers possess valuable insights about their work that managers need to hear.

On Motivation:

• Taylor: External control through financial incentives, time studies, and close supervision drives performance.
• Psychology Pioneers: Intrinsic motivation through freedom from fear, autonomy, and meaningful work unleashes human potential.

On Conflict and Differences:

• Taylor: Eliminate conflict through standardisation, clear hierarchical authority, and scientific job design.
• Psychology Pioneers: Integrate differences through collaborative problem-solving to create innovative solutions.

The Self-Fulfilling Prophecy Problem

McGregor’s most devastating insight was showing how Taylor’s collective assumptions and beliefs become self-fulfilling prophecies. When you treat people as lazy and irresponsible (Theory X), you create systems that make them behave exactly that way. When you assume people are capable and self-directed (Theory Y), you create conditions where they rise to meet those expectations.

Follett understood this decades earlier, recognising that “power over” approaches create resistance and compliance, whilst “power with” approaches generate genuine engagement and creativity. The key insight: collective assumptions and beliefs about human nature shape organisational reality more than formal structures or policies.

Why the Psychology Revolution Is Necessary

By the 1920s-1960s, these pioneers recognised that Taylor’s mechanistic approach had hit a psychological ceiling. Whilst scientific management could optimise individual tasks, it couldn’t:

• Adapt to changing conditions requiring worker creativity
• Tap into people’s capacity for innovation and problem-solving
• Create sustainable motivation beyond basic economic needs
• Build the collaborative capabilities needed for complex work
• Generate the organisational learning necessary for continuous improvement

The psychology pioneers didn’t just offer improvements to Taylor’s system—they offered a completely different foundation based on understanding human psychology rather than ignoring it.

The Irony of Implementation

Interestingly, many organisations that claimed to move beyond Taylorism actually just made it more sophisticated. Performance management systems, detailed job descriptions, and standardised processes embody Taylor’s assumptions whilst using the language of empowerment and engagement.

This mirrors a famous irony in software development: Winston Royce’s 1970 paper “Managing the Development of Large Software Systems” described what we now call the Waterfall model—but he explicitly warned that

“the implementation described above is risky and invites failure.”

~ Winston Royce

Royce never advocated for the use of Waterfall as a viable methodology and called the model “grandiose,” arguing that it doesn’t work because requirements change over time. Yet for decades, organisations adopted Waterfall as standard practice, ignoring Royce’s warnings about its deficiencies.

Similarly, Taylor’s Scientific Management was adopted widely despite early critiques. Organisations embraced the surface-level practices—time studies, standardisation, efficiency measures—whilst ignoring the psychological costs that Follett, McGregor, and others had identified. The psychology pioneers understood that truly moving beyond Taylor required fundamental shifts in assumptions about human nature, not just surface-level changes in practices.

The Modern Echo

Today’s organisational debates often replay this fundamental divide. Digital surveillance tools, algorithmic management, and detailed productivity metrics echo Taylor’s mechanistic assumptions. Meanwhile, approaches emphasising freedom from fear, distributed decision-making, and human-AI collaboration reflect the psychology pioneers’ insights.

The choice between these worldviews isn’t merely philosophical—it determines what’s possible in terms of innovation, adaptation, and human flourishing in organisational life. As these six pioneers understood, sustainable organisational success requires working with human psychology, not against it.

Why This Matters More Than Ever

Today’s organisational challenges—from digital transformation to hybrid work to sustainability—all have deep psychological dimensions. The technical solutions are often obvious; the psychological barriers are what prevent implementation.

Peter Drucker’s prescient concept of “knowledge work,” introduced in 1959, anticipated many of these challenges. Drucker recognised that

“the most valuable asset of a 21st-century institution, whether business or non-business, will be its knowledge workers and their productivity.”

~ Peter Drucker

He understood that knowledge work—where people “apply theoretical and analytical knowledge, acquired through formal training, to develop products and services”—requires fundamentally different approaches than industrial work.

Software development exemplifies this shift perfectly. Software developers are archetypal collaborative  knowledge workers because they exemplify collaborative knowledge work where, as Drucker noted, “continuing innovation has to be part of the work, the task and the responsibility of knowledge workers.” The psychology pioneers’ insights become even more crucial in this context: software teams that embrace psychological principles like freedom from fear, shared decision-making, and learning from failure consistently outperform those managed through traditional command-and-control approaches.

Consider these contemporary challenges through the lens of these six pioneers:

Remote Work: The debate about productivity and collaboration misses the psychological reality that trust, belonging, and meaning can’t be mandated—they emerge from how managers think about and treat people. Follett’s “power with” and McGregor’s Theory Y provide blueprints for distributed decision-making that works. Drucker’s insight that “knowledge workers have to manage themselves” and “have to have autonomy” becomes essential when physical oversight is impossible.

Digital Transformation: Most failures aren’t technical but psychological—people resist change not because they can’t learn new systems, but because the change threatens their identity, competence, or relationships, and their individual and collective assumptions and beliefs.

Innovation: Organisations spend billions on innovation processes whilst maintaining cultures that punish failure, discourage experimentation, and reward conformity. The psychology matters more than the processes. When organisations truly embrace the psychology pioneers’ insights about human nature and intrinsic motivation, they achieve what Buckminster Fuller called synergy – where

“behavior of whole systems [is] unpredicted by the behavior of their parts taken separately.”

~ Richard Buckminster Fuller

This synergistic principle, which is reflected in the Synergistic Mindset of the Marshall Model, reveals why psychology-centred approaches consistently generate emergent capabilities that mechanistic management a.k.a. the Anaytic Mindset cannot engineer or control.

Diversity and Inclusion: Sustainable progress requires examining unconscious assumptions and defensive routines, not just policies and training programmes.

The Enduring Legacy

The work of Follett, McGregor, Argyris, Deming, Schön, and Schein offers us a fundamental shift in how we think about organisations. They showed us that:

• Psychology isn’t soft—it’s the hardest thing to get right
• Human collective assumptions and beliefs shape organisational reality more than formal structures
• “Power with” creates more sustainable results than “power over”
• Culture eats strategy for breakfast because culture operates exclusively through collective assumptions and beliefs
• Learning organisations require psychological courage, not just learning systems
• Sustainable change happens through people, not to people

Their insights remain remarkably fresh because they focused on unchanging aspects of human nature rather than management fads. People still need freedom from fear to perform at their best. Organisations still develop defensive routines that prevent learning. Collective assumptions and beliefs still become self-fulfilling prophecies. Culture still operates through unconscious collective assumptions and beliefs. Fear still destroys more potential than any external threat.

The Challenge for Organisations

The message from these psychology pioneers is both humbling and empowering: if you want to liberate organisational performance, start with the psychology. This means:

• Examining your own mental models, defensive routines, and collective assumptions and beliefs
• Creating conditions where people can bring their full capabilities to work
• Designing change processes that honour human psychology rather than ignoring it
• Building learning capability that challenges existing collective assumptions and beliefs, not just delivering solutions (See: Memeology)

The technical challenges facing organisations today are significant, but they’re not the limiting factor. The limiting factor, as these six visionaries understood decades ago, is our willingness to take psychology seriously as the foundation of organisational excellence.

As systems thinker Donella Meadows would later articulate in her famous “Leverage Points,” the highest-leverage interventions in any system are at the level of paradigms and mindsets—exactly where these psychology pioneers focused their work. Meadows observed that

“the higher the leverage point, the more the system will resist changing it”

~ Donella Meadows

which explains both why these insights about human psychology are so powerful and why they continue to face such obdurate resistance.

Their legacy reminds us that organisations aren’t machines to be engineered, but human systems to be understood, nurtured, and continuously developed. In our data-driven, technology-obsessed world, this insight is more valuable than ever.

Yet despite all the evidence, despite all the research, despite nearly a century of proof that psychology-centred approaches consistently outperform mechanistic ones, it looks like Thinking Differently remains a niche. The Analytic Mindset still dominates, treating people as programmable resources rather than complex psychological beings capable of extraordinary creativity and collaboration when the conditions are right. The Synergistic Mindset gets nary a mention.

Afterword: The Persistent Paradox

One of the most frustrating paradoxes in organisational life is how little these fundamental truths about human nature and organisational dynamics seem to sway managers and executives. Here we have nearly a century of evidence, from rigorous research to real-world case studies, showing that psychology-informed approaches consistently outperform mechanistic ones—yet managers and executives continue to default to command-and-control, measurement-obsessed, fear-based approaches.

Why does this persist? Several factors contribute to this obdurate resistance:

The seductive simplicity of control: Taylor’s approach feels more controllable and predictable. It’s much easier to measure hours worked—never mind the quality of those hours—than psychological engagement, easier to implement standardised processes than to create conditions for emergence and creativity.

Short-term pressure vs. long-term thinking: Psychology-informed approaches often require patience and investment before you see results. Quarterly earnings pressure doesn’t reward building trust or developing people’s intrinsic motivation.

The self-selection problem: The types of people who rise to executive positions often got there by mastering power-over dynamics. They may genuinely not understand or trust power-with approaches because they’ve never experienced them.

Cognitive dissonance: Many executives intellectually agree with these principles but can’t reconcile them with the competitive, zero-sum mental models they operate from. So they implement “engagement surveys” and “wellness programmes” whilst maintaining fundamentally Taylorist structures.

The Waterfall problem redux: Just like with Royce’s warnings about Waterfall, people grab the surface-level techniques—team building, open offices, flat hierarchies—whilst completely missing the deeper psychological principles.

Perhaps most challenging of all, these insights about human nature are so fundamental that they require questioning collective assumptions and beliefs that feel existential to many managers’ sense of identity and competence. As Donella Meadows observed, “the higher the leverage point, the more the system will resist changing it.” The psychology pioneers were working at the highest leverage points in organisational systems—which explains both why their insights are so powerful and why they continue to be resisted or superficially implemented.

John Seddon’s work on systems thinking and his critique of command-and-control approaches represents a contemporary voice continuing this tradition, showing how the psychology pioneers’ insights remain as relevant as ever in understanding why target-driven, measurement-obsessed approaches consistently fail to unlock human potential.

Martin Seligman’s positive psychology movement has similarly extended these insights, demonstrating through rigorous research how focusing on human strengths, engagement, and flourishing—rather than deficits and pathology—creates more effective organisations and healthier individuals.

Jim McCarthy’s influential work on software development team dynamics, particularly his focus on “group psyche” and concepts like “Don’t Flip the Bozo Bit,” showed how psychology-centred approaches could transform software delivery—recognising that team dynamics, not technical factors, are usually the primary constraint in collaborative knowledge work.

My own work in Organisational Psychotherapy extends these insights into the post-1990s era, applying contemporary psychotherapy research to help organisations surface and reflect upon the collective assumptions and beliefs that drive their behaviour—bringing the psychology pioneers’ vision into the 21st century.

Our six giants represent the foundational era when psychology first challenged the mechanistic view of organisations (roughly 1920s-1980s). The revolution in organisational thinking they started remains unfinished, waiting for organisations courageous enough to embrace the full implications of taking human psychology seriously.

In fact, we’ve been waiting so long we might be forgiven for suggesting that management and managers are a key aspect of the problem. The very concept of “management” as a distinct class of people whose job is to control and direct others may be fundamentally incompatible with the psychology pioneers’ insights about human nature and motivation. Perhaps the real revolution isn’t just about better management practices, but about questioning whether traditional management hierarchies are necessary at all in knowledge work environments where, as Drucker observed, workers must manage themselves.

I have explored this radical possibility in my “Organisational Psychotherapy” series, particularly in “Quintessence,” which maps out how highly effective collaborative knowledge work organisations operate without traditional management structures. My work demonstrates that when organisations truly embrace psychology-centred approaches—making “no topics taboo or undiscussable” and building cultures around “collective beliefs and assumptions” that honour human nature—they achieve what I term “quintessential” effectiveness that far exceeds traditionally managed organisations.

Further Reading

Argyris, C. (1990). Overcoming organizational defenses: Facilitating organizational learning. Allyn & Bacon.

Argyris, C., & Schön, D. A. (1974). Theory in practice: Increasing professional effectiveness. Jossey-Bass.

Argyris, C., & Schön, D. A. (1978). Organizational learning: A theory of action perspective. Addison-Wesley.

Berne, E. (1961). Transactional analysis in psychotherapy. Grove Press.

Berne, E. (1964). Games people play: The psychology of human relationships. Grove Press.

Deming, W. E. (1982). Out of the crisis. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Center for Advanced Engineering Study. (Reissued 1986, MIT Press)

Deming, W. E. (1993). The new economics for industry, government, education. MIT Press.

Drucker, P. F. (1959). The landmarks of tomorrow. Harper & Row.

Drucker, P. F. (1999). Knowledge-worker productivity: The biggest challenge. California Management Review, 41(2), 79-94.

Follett, M. P. (1924). Creative experience. Longmans, Green.

Follett, M. P. (1995). Mary Parker Follett: Prophet of management (P. Graham, Ed.). Harvard Business School Press. (Original work published 1918)

Frankl, V. E. (1946). Man’s search for meaning. Beacon Press.

Fuller, R. B. (1969). Operating manual for spaceship earth. Southern Illinois University Press.

Fuller, R. B. (1975). Synergetics: Explorations in the geometry of thinking, Volume 1. Macmillan Publishing.

Immelman, R. (2013). Great boss dead boss. Partridge Publishing.

Kahane, A. (2010). Power and love: A theory and practice of social change. Berrett-Koehler Publishers.

Marshall, R. W. (2019). Hearts over diamonds: Serving business and society through organisational psychotherapy. Leanpub. https://leanpub.com/heartsoverdiamonds

Marshall, R. W. (2021). Memeology: Surfacing and reflecting on the organisation’s collective assumptions and beliefs. Leanpub. https://leanpub.com/memeology

Marshall, R. W. (2021). Quintessence: An acme for highly effective software development organisations. Leanpub. https://leanpub.com/quintessence

McCarthy, J. (1995). Dynamics of software development. Microsoft Press.

McGregor, D. (1960). The human side of enterprise. McGraw-Hill.

Meadows, D. H. (1999). Leverage points: Places to intervene in a system. Hartland: The Sustainability Institute.

Meadows, D. H. (2008). Thinking in systems: A primer. Chelsea Green Publishing.

Rosenberg, M. B. (2003). Nonviolent Communication: A Language of Life. PuddleDancer Press.

Royce, W. W. (1970). Managing the development of large software systems. Proceedings of IEEE WESCON, 26, 1–9.

Rother, M. (2009). Toyota Kata: Managing people for improvement, adaptiveness and superior results. McGraw-Hill.

Schein, E. H. (1985). Organizational culture and leadership. Jossey-Bass.

Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Basic Books.

Seddon, J. (2003). Freedom from command and control: A better way to make the work work. Buckingham: Vanguard Consulting Ltd.

Seligman, M. E. P. (2002). Authentic happiness: Using the new positive psychology to realize your potential for lasting fulfillment. Free Press.

Seligman, M. E. P. (2011). Flourish: A visionary new understanding of happiness and well-being. Free Press.

Taylor, F. W. (1911). The principles of scientific management. Harper & Brothers.

The work of Mary Parker Follett, Douglas McGregor, Chris Argyris, W. Edwards Deming, Donald Schön, and Edgar Schein created the intellectual foundation for modern organisational development. Their focus on psychology as the key driver continues to invite us to consider how we think about leadership, learning, and change in organisations.