What Motivates Us?
I’m currently studying business studies with the Open University and have come across an interesting concept which I’m sure at least some of you are aware of that has piqued my interest. I have quite a strong interest in personal development (stop snickering at the back, yes I’m talking to you englishmum and Laura) and have read several books on the subject so I’m quite surprised that I haven’t come across this theory.
The theory I’m wittering on about (if anyone is left) is Maslow’s hierarchy of needs.
The theory goes that each level of the pyramid must be completed or ‘fulfilled’ before you ascend to the next level. The level above where you are on the pyramid is what motivates you.
I think we can take a parenting angle here, I think we are concerned with our children in the same way. Once we have cleaned and fed them and secured their safety we can turn our attention to socialising them and beyond that enrolling them in all sorts of clubs and activities to build self esteem, and if we can get past busying their schedules they may even have some time for some self-actualisation of their own!
Back on a personal level I think the pyramid is kind of a two way street, a bit like snakes and ladders. If a lower level on the pyramid is not fulfilled then you slide back down to fulfil that level before you can return your attention to the upper levels.
I think I’m probably at the highest point I’ve ever been, hovering between esteem and self-actualisation. Once you reach the dizzy heights of self-actualisation this is said to be more of an experience than a goal. The more you ‘self-actualise’ the more the desire is flamed, if that makes sense. Self-actualisation is the process of fulfilling ones potential, this doesn’t solely relate to work or money but comes more from within a sort of inner assurance that develops with age, experience and I guess the process of self-actualisation.
Characteristics of Self-Actualised People
* Realistic perception of self and external world
* Ability to focus on solving problems outwith their own being, this may involve charity work, volunteering etc..
* Focus on developing their individual potential
* May appear unconventional in their words and actions, they aren’t merely a sheep so their thinking may seem ‘out of the box’
As with many theories Maslow’s hierarchy of needs has proved controversial, criticism of Maslow’s work has focused on whether there is a hierarchial order to our needs at all.
Your thoughts… don’t be shy, throw them out there. Do you agree with the theory or disagree? Are you surprised by where you fit on the pyramid…do you think it can relate to parenting in any way?
I've been blogging for four years and write about anything and everything that takes my fancy.
Above is me with my beloved Ernie in Port Aventura and left with our love child in Florida.
Themocracy
Interesting. I think that people with low self esteem can still be very creative even if they haven’t developed the confidence to promote their creative work or make a living from it. I would say the self esteem layer could float up or down the pyramid depending on your personality traits. Just my initial thoughts on reading it – I am definitely no expert.
Hmmm, very interesting, I agree with you that it’s more like snakes and ladders, or maybe a maze, than a pyramid – but food for thought, definitely. And congratulations on finding the time for study!!
I’m not sure it works for me. I’d be on the bottom tier with my lack of sleep but have alot of what is above it too.
I agree with Jennysnail, alot of creative people lack self esteem, the phrase ‘tortured artist’ is testament to that.
Very interesting stuff indeed.
Jenny – I think that’s the interesting thing about discussing these theories, you don’t need to be an expert you just need an opinion.
Thanks DD, my self esteem bar goes up when I’m studying
Very interesting model, good for getting you thinking. I would take issue with the hierarchical nature. People can be creative without having self esteem, but of course creativity is stronger if you do have self esteem. Oh, I said that without reading first comment, so it seems we’re onto a theme here! Having just come back from a residential with young people who are reasonably disempowered, I would hope that it’s not hierarchical and you can work on many levels at the same time. I find the types of needs very useful, great for discussion and will definitely use this at work. Many thanks for sharing!!!
Interesting question: how does the pyramid fit in with motherhood. I would say that for many of the women I know and some of what I read, the pyramid can be a inverted. That is, it’s hard to be a “good mother” in my opinion if you don’t have the stuff at the top such as self-esteem and self-actualisation. That’s not to say that anybody with low self esteem isn’t a good parent! But that ideally I’d have the bottom tier, the love tier and the top tier. Of course, the bottom tier includes SEX as a necessity. As any parent knows, that’s not exactly true…
Warning! Rant alert, please don’t be offended!
I think like most of these models, it’s good for stimulating thought but not so good if you start to pick at it critically.
Firstly, Maslow invented it based on his own experience and on the biographies a a few historical figures he admired but didn’t actually do any empirical research (note – I’m a post-structuralist by academic inclination but even I have problems with personality models that are basically made up, however one might appreciate the artistry involved).
Secondly, it assumes that we have one, coherent linear identity. I’d contend that we don’t – we have many and each one operates at a different stage in the terms of this kind of model – or simultaneously.
Thirdly, these identities are highly contingent and subject to a lot of stereotyping – for example, creative people lacking in self-esteem. I know what you mean but, say, Sting, anyone? It promotes easy categorisation which I worry about.
Maslow’s hierarchy is popular amongst business schools and life coaches for obvious reasons (very easy to sell, intuitively attractive, simple to explain, fits apparent evidence at first glance…) but it’s also very Western – the very hierarchical set-up suggests that if you haven’t got past level A, you can’t get to level B whereas research on peak experiences suggests that creative people or sporting people can access peak experiences who may well be close to the bottom of Maslow’s scale and Buddhist thought focuses on removing concern with the lower levels, even love (that’s an appallingly poor summary!)
GOOD THINGS ABOUT MASLOW
He looked beyond medicine and numbers to make psychology relevant to everyone rather than just the sick. It isn’t his fault what marketeers have done to his system
Cartside, interesting, I’m wondering now that if be achieving some self-actualisation that that doesn’t actually improve self esteem.
Jen – I like your theory of the inverted pyramid. Is becoming a mother also part of becoming self-actualised? If not, then it has certainly at least led me to want to work on self-actualisation, if that makes sense….
Dad Who Writes – No offence, it’s not my theory…
I agree some great things have been achieved by people living in poverty, perhaps even because they are in poverty. I also think that sex fits better into the love tier, I ain’t worried about sex if I can’t feed and keep myself and family safe!
Okay, I think it’s nonsense. We are all individuals and you could be one thing one day, something else the next. Life is about action not theories… The time people spend sitting around discussing stuff these ‘gurus’ come up with would be better spent getting off their arses and like, doing something? Much love, please don’t do the face at me. (I think this is a more simplistic answer but with the same thought behind it as Dad who writes? Good day to you.
I do agree with Maslow, with a slight reservation. As I recall from my Leadership & Managment modules you didn’t have to hit every single one of the traits on a tier before moving up to the next one. I take it with a bit of a pinch of salt. As long as your physcial needs are taken care of you move to the next tier. You don’t need to list every physical need you have, everyone’s will be different. I agree with it in principle. It’s like not running before you can walk. I don’t think you can achieve everything on the top tier without at least having some from the bottom. We shouldn’t take it as literally as people do.
I love theories on motivation, it’s one of my favourite topics and I always choose essays & exam questions on it. I love the Hawthorne effect, people are motivated if you just take a bit of interest in them. You don’t necessarily have to do anything to improve their lives/work place, just talk to them, be interested in them and ‘see’ them. I relate to that far more than Maslow, in HR, management, business, real life and parenting.
Linda – if these people did get off their arses & do something then rather than coming up with these theories I’d be bolloxed as there’s be nothing for me to study for my masters
Linda – You have fire in your belly today? It’s part of my study Linda so I kinda need to discuss and ponder it, also I think by discussing such theories it clarifies your own thoughts and how you think about things whether you agree with the theory or not.
Isn’t action itself based on an idea, a thought you want to do something, these theories are surely just an extension of an idea. Do you see where I’m coming from?
Is there something about Maslow’s theory that you particular disagree with, or do you just hate discussing theories?
Emma – I’ll need to read up on Hawthorne, in fact it may be in this module I’m doing at the moment.
Aha! Well I suppose am just too busy to think about it, heh.
I think what I am saying is, as Dad who Writes points out, as interesting or otherwise these theories may be, and however useful in an acadmeic context, I thing for anyone wanting to find say greater confidence or achieve things, trying to persuade themselves of whether they fit in to some ‘theory’ or not can be counter productive.
I led a training course on Saturday (get me) and not for the first time, people said it was ‘inspirational’ and so on – which is lovely to hear. But when interested in how to be happy/more successful (whatever that means) /more content as so many of us are, I just wish we could all look to ourselves more and what we have to make this happen and value our own unique strengths and character – not be fed a load of theories etc by marketing people. Maybe am not making sense. I’m just saying that these theories when applied to real life as opposed to a learning environment, where everyone is different and don’t start from a level playing field, make a lot less sense, in my most humblest of opinions.
I am also illiterate but never mind.
Thanks for the reply Linda. Maybe I haven’t articulated myself well in my post. The topic came up *very* recently during my study, I am to early in my learning to have any strong opinions on it and I thought it would be helpful to me to see what others thought, and a nice departure drom my usual blog topics.
The only reason I mentioned real life situations (ie parenting) was because I was thinking aloud really…it wasn’t my definitive opinion and I certainly didn’t mean to cause offence.
Also it was my understanding that this was not a marketing theory but more a social science topic as it was covered under the human resorce management section of my course.
Our discussion has demonstrated just how controversial these theories can be and as you’ve said you mustn’t let them limit you.
PS and you’re definitly not illiterate, have you seen my ‘maternity tales’ boob
If I had seen any of your boobs, I would remember.
Ok, I totally walked into that one
Another interesting point about motivation and the tricky issue of the ordering of the hierarchy – I recall from my course how Goal Setting Theory research (Locke and Latham – here’s a summary paper they wrote in 2002 http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dabbish/locke.pdf) showed how having goals – achievable, specific ones – was more motivating than factors such as pay, which goes against the idea that material needs have to be met before higher, more abstracted ones can be engaged.
Ok, so we’re all kind of agreed that all the tiers moyivate us but not necessarily in that order, right?
@littlemummy re: self-actualisation. I can’t speak for other mothers but I think I’m finally becoming a bit more self-actualised as a result of being a mother…but it’s taken some time to get there!
Wicked discussion Erica. I think the bottom two are in the right place, but the top three are very much an individual thing and not necessarily dependent on each other. They definitely influence each other at times, but can exist together, separately or not at all. Brilliant post.
Thanks Jo, it’s been refreshing to discuss something other than parenting or blogging
Wow, I haven’t heard much about Maslow since I studied him at university about 15 years ago. Behavioural/motivational models like this and Herzberg’s Hygiene Factors are good for doing a bit of self analysis but if you begin to take them too seriously, you need to buy either the dilbert principle of the weasel way by Scott Adams imho
Have you done any transactional analysis? (Eric Byrne) I think this provides some really interest insight into how we interact and is a fairly easy read if you get hold of a copy of Games People Play
Alex – Have only just begun studying this but the Maslow thing really interested me, will need to get hold of a few of these I think, I’ll make a note, cheers
[...] hard going it’s not the most interesting (for me) topic, although I did enjoy the bit about Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. I’m now in the process of writing the second [...]