Maslow Discredited?

Mason

En-Route
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
2,776
Location
Moved from SOCAL back to Iowa.
Display Name
Mase
When I took my first airline management position, one of the canons of management theory was Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs.

Apparently, this theory has been discredited? Any recent MBAs out there that can comment?

I don't care any more, I am out of that, but am curious.
 
I'm fairly sure Maslow's hierarchy of needs originated in the domain of psychology, not management.
 
I'm fairly sure Maslow's hierarchy of needs originated in the domain of psychology, not management.


However I certainly have run across those needs in my courses involving management of people.
 
However I certainly have run across those needs in my courses involving management of people.

Yes but my point being it would be up to the psychiatric scholars to discredit Maslow, so one might ask them. As to whether the application of his theory of hierarchy of needs to business management is valid, that's a differ question.
 
Was it ever 'credited' ?

Few of these psychological concepts have ever found empiric validation, and if they did, the validation was carefully constructed to confirm the hypothesis rather than to disprove it. For a psychological concept to make it into the textbooks, it requires two things:
- someone who needs tenure
- it has to fit into some sort of diagram, circle, triangle, pyramid.

A good example of this (From FAA publication H-8083-9A ) :
 

Attachments

  • Bloom.JPG
    Bloom.JPG
    70.9 KB · Views: 22
Reading his Toward a Psychology of Being was a major turning point in how I saw myself and how I dealt with others. The "Hierarchy of Needs", while totally a psychological concept, is a valuable management tool since managing people is all about psychology. I am not surprised it is in a MBA syllabus.
 
One might argue over minor ordering issues in the hierarchy of needs, but otherwise it's fairly self evident.
 
I'm fairly sure Maslow's hierarchy of needs originated in the domain of psychology, not management.

True, which means that any attempt to determine whether it's been "discredited" would assume the premise that psychology is a science to begin with, which is a pretty shaky assumption, at best.

Research has shown that asking every member of a panel of 12 psychologists the same question will result in an aggregate mean of 15 different answers per panel, with no point of agreement except that each psychologist will be convinced that all the others are wrong.

-Rich
 
True, which means that any attempt to determine whether it's been "discredited" would assume the premise that psychology is a science to begin with, which is a pretty shaky assumption, at best.

Research has shown that asking every member of a panel of 12 psychologists the same question will result in an aggregate mean of 15 different answers per panel, with no point of agreement except that each psychologist will be convinced that all the others are wrong.

-Rich

+1 :yes:

Cheers
 
It's a solid foundation for understanding rational people.

Folks like the authors of Freakonomics and others, have been expanding the realm of knowledge on why people do seemingly irrational things that go against Maslow's hierarchy.

I suspect if you're hearing it's been "discredited", that's coming from folks who are misinterpreting the newer information.

Often when you dig hard you find a deep seeded instinctual drive that underlies why someone does irrational things.

The best example is the claim that something is "Free!" We humans are acutely attuned to that one.

Take two products, price them Net-identical for total cost to your door, and a huge number of people will go for the one with "Free shipping!" even if the total price is the same.

There's even some elasticity in that, where the lower total price product that doesn't have "Free shipping!" will sell less than a higher priced product that has it.

So by Maslow's little pyramid, the rational person would always buy the less expensive product.

But it's not always what actually happens.

More to the point of Maslow's tree, some people will go hungry to have a $200 pair of tennis shoes, too. They value how they're seen higher than eating.

The best managers find out what motivates individuals, since everyone's private circumstances are different.

A personal example: I can afford to take a month or more off, unpaid. My boss is clueless that he could leverage my desire to do so into a crap-ton of work out of me. Or his hands are tied on that particular option, perhaps. My motivational levels and overall output of work would go through the roof, if I could honestly plan a month or two off each year to completely disconnect and travel. I'd even do it unpaid.

"You get XYZ [really hard] project done, and tested working... You get to leave as soon as it's finished, and I'll see you in August."

I'd be working 20 hour days to complete it and up all night testing. That's just how I work.


The above also leads me to believe I'm headed for building my own business eventually... Just a mixture of not finding the right shingle to hang, and being a big chicken-****/slightly too risk-averse.

Same problem buying into the airplane, knowing it was a bad fiscal decision but wanting to do it anyway. Mrs Denverpilot provided a kick in the ass to move me off the fence because she saw the intangible benefits to me that I didn't see. Best thing I've done in my personal life in a decade. Doesn't matter if I lose my shirt on the thing at the end, I've just adjusted the budget accordingly and made peace with it to gain the happiness and joy of walking to the hangar with keys in hand whenever I feel the urge.

Maslow would say owning an aircraft was way at the tippy-top of his list. But I'd give up a lot, if necessary, to own an airplane now that I have.
 
Maslow's has been very relevant in the self-evaluation of my life and the scarcity of it. In my case, the model has fit like a glove.

My favorite case study of Maslow's order of those Needs is the regional airline FO. The way in which these individuals constantly struggle between the whipsawing created by their desire to meet their level IV esteem needs while unable to meet their level II security needs is a very redeeming support for the non-negotiable nature to the order in which the Needs demand to be met. It certainly is the reason I never attempted to pursue such a vocational avenue.

To those in vocations that do not provide a support to level II needs, Maslow is akin to life's big middle finger being stuck in your face. The more irrational steps you take to buck the order, the bigger the finger gets.
 
To those in vocations that do not provide a support to level II needs, Maslow is akin to life's big middle finger being stuck in your face. The more irrational steps you take to buck the order, the bigger the finger gets.

LOL. Nicely written.

Problem is, in the Age of confiscating wealth to redistribute it, the dude buying the $200 tennis shoes who is willing to go hungry, probably has a plan to go get the lower level stuff on the list, by force. Whether by his vote for a wealth redistributor, or by robbing a convenience store...

It's the secret plans underneath the observable ones, that tweak confirming whether or not Maslow was right.

If the guy Believes, he can have his $200 shoes and his cake. Yes We Can!

:) :) :)

And there's always the small percentage of humans who are mentally broken in some fashion who'll do things non-Maslow-ish. Trauma does odd things to humans. Take my stepdad who is into his 60s but still can't get over a poor childhood even though there's about a 0% chance he will ever be that poor again, who eats food as fast as possible so he can get to the seconds before they're gone, even when there's three more complete meals laid out on the holiday table for family, with the intent that everyone will be taking home lots of yummy leftovers.

His actions are based in Maslow but are hardwired by childhood hunger and he literally can't help himself. Therefore breaking Maslow's theory in the present.

He also stockpiles food in the pantry. More than he will need.
 
Back
Top