beyond maslow’s hierarchy of needs

7/21/2019 Beyond Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/beyond-maslows-hierarchy-of-needs 1/5

Does Maslow’s hierarchy of needs come to mind when you think about what

people struggle for in terms of motivation development? First developed in

1954, Maslow’s hallmark theory has endured for years. However, performers

may be motivated to achieve by more than just those five goals. A novel

theory of motivation developed in 1992 integrates a variety of modern theories of moti-

vation and delineates 24 goals for which we humans strive.

Beginning With Maslow

Abraham Maslow can be characterized as a humanistic actualization psychologist. His

theory of personality is concerned with needs of normal and creative people (Maddi,

1977; Maslow, 1970), and has yielded a hierarchical list of needs with physiological

needs at its base and psychological needs at the top. Needs at the bottom of the list must

be fulfilled before motivation can be derived from the needs at the top of the hierarchy.

In other words, once the physiological needs are met, the psychological needs serve as

motivators of action. From highest to lowest, the needs are sequenced as follows:

• Self-actualization

• Self-esteem

• Belongingness needs• Safety needs

• Physiological needs

Maslow defined these needs as goal states that motivate and drive people to increase and

reduce tension (Maddi, 1977; Maslow, 1970).

Physiological needs refer to needs such as food, water, and sleep. Safety needs refer to

the need for shelter and protection from danger. Belongingness needs refer to the need

to be part of a group and also to the need to love and be loved. Esteem needs concern the

need to feel good about oneself, one’s abilities and characteristics. At the top of Maslow’s

hierarchy of motivators is self-actualization.

Self-actualization is the process of fulfilling one’s potential. This requires increasing tension by going beyond a homeostatic state of being (internal equilibrium) by doing something cre-

ative (or having “peak experiences”) that reorganize one and create another higher-level

homeostatic state. Peak experiences are exciting, overwhelming experiences that allow one

to fulfill all of one’s potential (Maddi, 1977). As a person self-actualizes, he or she becomes

more complex, differentiated, and effective (Maddi, 1977). Self-actualized individuals are

unique yet “universal.” This means that they are different than the majority of people in

some significant way but that they can relate to and identify with the majority of people.

That is, they are independent, but they also identify with others (Frame, 1996).

Performance Improvement • Volume 43 • Number 10 27

Beyond Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs

WhatDoPeople StriveFor?by Kimberly A. Gordon Rouse



28www.ispi.org • NOV/DEC 2004

Challenges to Maslow’s Needs

Many performance technology theorists and practitioners are

adherents of Maslow’s hierarchy, but there are also those

who raise challenges (Bellott & Tutor, 1990; Frame, 1996;

Maddi, 1977; Sackett, 1998). Some have questioned the

practicality and reality of the hierarchy, the process by

which people proceed through the hierarchy, and its rele-

vance and applicability to modern society.

Practicality and Reality of the Hierarchy

Maslow admits that only a few people reach self-actualization.

If this is true, self-actualization is likely not the highest level

motivator for the majority of the people. Frame (1996) states

that it is hard to imagine the existence of a large number of

self-actualized people, because while Maslow claims that the

value system of a self-actualized person is unique and dif-

ferent from the majority, he also suggests that these individ-

uals are somehow “more completely socialized.” But how

can a person be more socialized if his or her value system is

different from the majority in society? Even some supportersof Maslow’s hierarchy point out that it is possible for people

to develop self-esteem without a need or desire for self-actu-

alization (Sackett, 1998). For instance, a teacher who does

not make an exorbitant salary may have peak experiences in

the classroom on a daily basis. Without a high salary, the

teacher may have trouble fulfilling physiological and safety

needs. But belongingness and self-esteem needs can be met

daily, and the teacher may be satisfied without ever reaching

self-actualization.

How People Proceed Through the Hierarchy

Sackett (1998) asserts that some people seem to be self-actu-

alized without first meeting the lower needs of Maslow’s

hierarchy. This brings us to another challenge: the process by

which a person proceeds through the hierarchy.

The prevalent belief is that one can proceed to the next level

of the hierarchy only after fulfilling the lower-level need

(Maddi, 1977; Maslow, 1970). The process or mechanism by

which one proceeds to the next need is not delineated clearly

by Maslow (Frame, 1996). In fact, the leap from self-esteem to

self-actualization involves operating from a feeling need to a

cognitive need (Frame, 1996). That is, self-esteem brings

about feelings of fulfillment, but self-actualization focuses on

cognition and thoughts. In addition, Sackett (1998) claims

that self-actualization may be a process itself, not necessarily

an end state. Perhaps the process of becoming self-actualized

and having peak experiences causes one to advance from

need to need. If this is true, is self-actualization the terminal

need in the hierarchy or a mechanism for traversing through

the hierarchy? Maslow’s final works did not clearly state his

beliefs on this issue.

The Heirarchy’s Application in Modern Life

A third challenge presents itself when one considers the

hierarchy’s application in modern society (Bellott & Tutor,

1990; Frame, 1996). For instance, one way self-esteem

comes about is through recognition from maximizing one’s

potential (self-actualization) (Bellot & Tutor, 1990). This

would imply that self-actualization is required to have self-

esteem, which would make self-esteem follow self-actual-

ization in the hierarchy. Therefore, self-esteem can be

argued to be on at least equal footing with self-actualization

as a motivator in today’s society. This may be important to

today’s employees in some professions (Bellot & Tutor,

1990) . Additionally, in today’s society, many people realize

only the first two needs: physiological needs and safety

needs; some people never reach belongingness or self-

esteem, not to mention self-actualization (Frame, 1996).

Through media messages, this society emphasizes fulfill-

ment through meeting lower-level needs. It may be that

people who emphasize these lower-level needs over higher

level needs can be just as motivated to perform as those

reaching for self-actualization. This would lead to the con-clusion that a person can accomplish much and be satisfied

in life by only focusing on lower-level needs.

Although Maslow’s hierarchy has stood the test of time,

research and theorizing have continued. A new theory has

emerged that purports that people are motivated by a number

of goals that are not in a permanent and universal hierarchy.

This theory came about as a method of integrating current

motivational theories. This is the motivational systems

theory (MST) (Ford, 1992, 1995), and its taxonomy of goals

serves as an alternative to Maslow’s needs.

An Alternative Theory

MST (Ford, 1992, 1995) is a theory of motivation that

espouses 24 human goals. It is based on psychological and

biological science. Ford’s theory is based on systems theory

that has been put forth by others as a good theory within cer-

tain business settings (Tesone, 2000). This theory focuses on

motivation and defines motivation as goals, emotions, and

personal agency beliefs. (Personal agency beliefs are beliefs

about one’s abilities as well as beliefs about support for one’s

abilities and goals within the environment). Ford’s theory

was created separately and without any knowledge of

Lichtenberg’s MST (1983), which is based on psychoanalysis

and espouses only five goals (Ford, personal communication, July 20, 2004).

MST integrates other theories of motivation and elaborates on

them. MST includes goals in its motivational equation in

accordance with goal-orientation theory, one aspect of which

is the belief that humans are motivated by goals. However,

goal orientation theory only espouses a small number of goals

that motivate people in the educational arena (Ames, 1992).



According to MST, there are 24 categories of needs or goals

for which individuals may strive (see Figure 1). These needs

are not hierarchical. In fact, according to MST, it is possible to

fulfill more than one need (that is, achieve more than one

goal) at the same time. Moreover, according to MST, more

motivating experiences help an individual achieve more

than one goal at the same time.

Other contemporary theories of motivation have contributed

to MST as well. Self-efficacy theory (Bandura, 1990)—beliefs

one holds about his or her ability to complete a certain task—

also undergirds MST. Personal agency beliefs (Ford, 1992,

1995) are similar to self-efficacy beliefs; however, personal

agency beliefs include beliefs about environmental support

in addition to beliefs about ability. Expectancy-value theory


DESIRED WITHIN-PERSON CONSEQUENCES

Affective Goals

Entertainment Experiencing excitement or heightened arousal; avoiding boredom or stressful inactivity

Tranquili ty Feeling relaxed and at ease; avoiding stressful over-arousal

Happiness Experiencing feelings of joy, satisfaction, or well-being; avoiding feelings of emotional distress or dissatisfaction

Bodily sensations Experiencing pleasure associated with physical sensations, physical movement, or bodily contact; avoiding unpleasant or

uncomfortable bodily sensations

Physical well-being Feeling healthy, energetic, or physically robust; avoiding feelings of lethargy, weakness, or ill health

Cognitive Goals

Exploration Satisfying one’s curiosity about personally meaningful events; avoiding a sense of being uninformed or not knowing what’s going on

Understanding Gaining knowledge or making sense out of something; avoiding misconceptions, erroneous beliefs, or feelings of confusion

Intellectual creativity Engaging in activities involving original thinking or novel or interesting ideas; avoiding mindless or familiar ways of thinking

Positive self-evaluation Maintaining a sense of self-confidence, pride, or self-worth; avoiding feelings of failure, guilt, or incompetence

Subjective Organization Goals

Unity Experiencing a profound or spiritual sense of connectedness, harmony, or oneness with people, nature or a greater power; avoiding

feelings of psychological disunity or disorganization

Transcendence Experiencing optimal or extraordinary states of functioning; avoiding feeling trapped within boundaries of ordinary experience

DESIRED PERSON-ENVIRONMENT CONSEQUENCES

Self-Assertive Social Relationship Goals

Individuality Feeling unique, special, or different; avoiding conformity with others

Self-determination Experiencing a sense of freedom to act or make choices; avoiding the feeling of being pressured, constrained, or coerced

Superiority Comparing favorably to others in terms of winning status, or success; avoiding unfavorable comparisons with others

Resource acquisition Obtaining approval, support, assistance, advice, or validation from others; avoiding social disapproval or rejection

Integrative Social Relationship Goals

Belongingness Building or maintaining attachments, friendships, intimacy, or a sense of community; avoiding feelings of social isolation

or separateness

Social responsibility Keeping interpersonal commitments, meetings social role obligations, and conforming to social and moral rules; avoiding social

transgressions and unethical or illegal conduct

Equity Promoting fairness, justice, reciproci ty, or equality; avoiding unfair or unjust actions

Resource provision Giving approval, support, assistance, advice, or validation to others; avoiding selfish or uncaring behavior

Task Goals

Mastery Meeting a challenging standard of achievement or improvement; avoiding incompetence, mediocrity, or decrements in performance

Task creativity Engaging in activities involving artistic expression or creativity; avoiding tasks that do not provide opportunities for creative action

Management Maintaining order, organization, or productivity in daily life tasks; avoiding sloppiness, inefficiency, or disorganization

Material gain Increasing the amount of money or tangible goods one has; avoiding the loss of money or material possessions

Safety Being unharmed,physical ly secure, and free from risk; avoiding threatening, depr iving,or harmful circumstances

Figure 1. The Ford and Nichols Taxonomy of Human Goals (Source:Adapted from Ford, 1992).



30www.ispi.org • NOV/DEC 2004

(Wigfield, 1994)—which states that people are more moti-

vated by goals that they both value and expect to accom-

plish—is another important building block for MST. MST

examines the importance or value that one places on goals.

MST also examines emotions, which few other motivational

theories consider (Ford, 1992). MST states that emotions pro-

vide energy for pursuing goals and help one to evaluate

whether a goal is obtainable.

The 24 goals of MST were discovered over years of research

and clinical work with a variety of students, clients, and pro-

fessionals (Ford & Nichols, 1987, 1991, 1992). Each of these

goals is a category of goals that represents a set of outcomes

that are similar in meaning. They have evidenced internal

consistency reliability as well as face, content, and construct

validity ( Ford & Nichols, 1992; Gordon Rouse, 2001).

These 24 human goals are divided into two overarching cat-

egories with three subcategories each. The overarching cate-

gories are “desired within-person consequences” and

“desired person-environment consequences.” Desired

within-person consequences are goals that involve a singleperformer and are usually positioned within that person and

his or her own subjective experience. Desired person-envi-

ronment consequences are goals that minimally involve a

single performer and something or someone within that

person’s environment. These are goals that relate to experi-

ences involving a person and something outside that person.

For example, resource acquisition may be the goal of a

person obtaining support from his or her environment.

The three subcategories of goals related to “desired within-

person consequences” are affective, cognitive, and subjective

organization goals. Affective goals are those that relate to

feelings and emotion states. Cognitive goals concern thoughtprocesses, and subjective organization goals are complex and

involve both affect and cognition. There are five affective

goals: entertainment, tranquility, happiness, bodily sensa-

tions, and physical well-being. Happiness equates to feelings

of satisfaction, while tranquility involves avoiding stress.

Entertainment equates with experiencing excitement; bodily

sensation is experiencing pleasing physical movement and

contact; and physical well-being is defined as feeling healthy

and robust.

There are four cognitive goals: exploration, understanding,

intellectual creativity, and positive self-evaluation.

Understanding includes gaining knowledge and intellectualcreativity concerns thinking interesting ideas. Exploration

involves satisfying curiosity, and positive self-evaluations

maintain self-worth.

There are only two subjective organization goals: unity and

transcendence. Unity equates to experiencing harmony or

oneness, while transcendence involves having experiences

that are not bound by ordinary life.

The three subcategories of goals related to “desired person-

environment consequences” are self-assertive social rela-

tionship, integrative social relationship, and task.

Self-assertive social goals bring attention and aid to oneself.

Integrative social goals provide for the maintenance and

enrichment of a group. Task goals relate to specific activities.

There are four self-assertive social relationship goals: indi-

viduality, self-determination, superiority, and resource

acquisition. Individuality means feeling unique, and superi-

ority involves obtaining feelings of reaching a desired status.

Self-determination concerns making one’s own choices, and

resource acquisition involves obtaining support.

There are four integrative social relationship goals: belong-

ingness, social responsibility, equity, and resource provision.

Belongingness equates to maintaining attachments, while

equity promotes equality. Social responsibility concerns ful-

filling obligations, and resource provision involves giving

support to others.

Finally, there are five task goals: mastery, task creativity,

management, material gain, and safety. Mastery seems toimprove an ability, skill, or level of knowledge; safety con-

cerns being physically secure. Task creativity involves

engaging in artistic expression; management aims at main-

taining order; and material gain concerns increasing one’s

amount of money and goods.

Application

What does all this mean for performance technologists? For

one, rather than five types of needs or goals, a bevy of moti-

vators can be seen to motivate performance. Second, this

affords performance technologists more goals by which to

motivate performers. Third, situations can be created that tapinto more than one goal in order to motivate employees more

effectively. Fourth, performers’ individual goals can better be

identified and aligned with the company’s goals. Last, it is

possible to more discreetly identify which goals motivate

individuals to greater levels of performance.

The 24 needs of MST are not hierarchical; more than one

goal may be fulfilled at a time. Therefore, performers may

have several goals that they are pursuing at once. They may

simultaneously be searching for happiness, transcendence,

mastery, management, and safety in their job duties. While

one of these goals may be stronger than others, performers

may still be searching for them all in their jobs.

Maximally motivating situations can be created by accom-

plishing more than one goal at a time (Ford, 1992, 1995).

Work tasks that tap into more than one goal are more moti-

vating. The business literature has suggested that having sup-

port for peak experiences and transcendence leads to a

happier, more productive work force (Keil, 1999; Tesone,

2000). Part of performance technologists’ role is to engineer



situations that simultaneously fulfill more than one goal. For

example, if a performer is motivated by mastery, manage-

ment, and understanding, he or she might be given the task

of designing a system to organize stock reports by topic. By

completing this task the individual is learning, organizing,

and improving competence. Other tasks that need to be com-

pleted can be assigned to other employees based on their

own particular combination of goals. For instance, an

employee who is motivated by tranquility, self-determina-

tion, and resource provision may be interested in researching

a business problem and creating a manual for other

employees to use to solve the problem. Again, while this task

would only be assigned if it is a company need, knowing

which goals motivate which employees helps task assign-

ment and keeps productivity high.

To create motivating environments for performers it is nec-

essary to ascertain what their goals are. Ford and Nichols

(1992) have created an assessment of personal goals that con-

tains questions related to each of the 24 goals in the MST tax-

onomy. Knowing which goals performers attend to is of

tremendous value when trying to motivate performance.

Conclusion

MST moves beyond Maslow’s five needs and presents more

goals that lead to various avenues for motivating performers to

succeed. MST presents a powerful alternative to Maslow’s hier-

archy of needs for helping performers attain increased levels of

productivity. It also offers a more practical and systemic

approach to understanding the relationship between goals,

emotions, and personal agency beliefs of performers.

References

Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms, structures, and student moti-

vation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 191-215.

Bandura, A. (1990). Perceived self-efficacy in the exercise

of personal agency. Applied Sport Psychology , 2, 128-163.

Bellott, F.K., & Tutor, F. D. (1990). A challenge to the con-

ventional wisdom of Herzberg and Maslow theories.

Presented at Mid-South Educational Research Association,

New Orleans: LA.

Ford, M. (1992). Motivating humans: Goals, emotions, and

personal agency beliefs. Newbury Park, CA: SagePublications, Inc.

Ford, M. (1995). Motivation and competence development

in special and remedial education. Intervention and School

Clinic , 31(2), 70-82.

Ford, M., & Nichols, C. (1987). A taxonomy of human goals

and some possible applications. In M.E. Ford & D.H. Ford

(Eds.), Humans as self-constructing living systems: Putting

the framework to work (289-311). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence

Earlbaum.

Ford, M., & Nichols, C. (1991). Using goal assessments to

identify motivational patterns and facilitate behavioral reg-

ulation and achievement. In M.L. Maehr & P.R. Pintrich

(Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement (vol. 7,

pp. 51-84). Greenwich, CT: JAI.

Ford, M., & Nichols, C. (1992). Manual: Assessment of per-

sonal goals. Stanford, CA: Stanford University.

Frame, D. (1996). Maslow’s hierarchy of needs revisited.

Interchange, 27 (1), 13-22.

Gordon Rouse, K.A. (2001). Resilient students’ goals and

motivation. Journal of Adolescence, 24, 461-472.

Kiel, J.M. (1999). Reshaping Maslow’s hierarchy of needs to

reflect today’s educational and managerial philosophies. Journal of Instructional Psychology , 26(3), 167.

Lichtenberg, J. (1983). Psychoanalysis and infant research.

Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Maddi, S.R. (1977). Personality theories: A comparative

analysis (3rd ed.). Homewood, IL: The Dorsey Press.

Maslow, A.H. (1970). Motivation and personality . New

York: Harper & Row.

Sackett, S.J. (1998). Career counseling as an aid to self-actu-

alization. Journal of Career Development , 24(3), 235-244.

Tesone, D.V. (2000). Leadership and motivating missions: A

model for organization from science literature. Journal of

Leadership Studies, 7 (1), 60-71.

Wigfield, A. (1994). Expectancy-value theory of achieve-

ment motivation: A developmental perspective.

Educational Psychology Review , 6(1) 49-78.

Kimberly A. Gordon Rouse is an Assistant Professor in the College of

Education at California State University,Sacramento. Her main areas of research

are motivation and educational resilience.Her article “Recognizing and Fostering

Resilience” appeared in this journal in 1998. She is thankful to Bill Coscarelli for

his comments on earlier drafts of this manuscript. Kimberly may be reached at

[email protected].


beyond maslow’s hierarchy of needs

Documents