Another criticism of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs

Maslow’s hierarchy of needs is widely taught to managers and others in business as a way of understanding people’s motivations.

It’s a useful starting point – managers don’t always get past first base when it comes to thinking about why other people do things.

The hierarchy of needs theory isn’t beyond criticism. I’ve dealt with criticism of the way the theory misses the spiritual dimension before.

Maslow says people attend to basic needs first and progressively deal with more complex matters until they reach  a point he calls self-actualisation at the top of the hierarchy’s pyramid. Not everyone gets that far.

The theory makes crude assumptions that simply don’t apply to everyone.

Maslow’s idea belongs to a time and place. Maslow was American and he first suggested the hierarchy in the 1940s. It’s highly specific to America’s individualist culture where middle-class people worry about their personal needs rather than any collective needs.

He makes no allowances for parents worrying about children or workers being concerned about colleagues.

All-in-all it’s a one dimensional view of how people behave.

But like I said earlier, even if Maslow’s hierarchy of needs is wrong, it has value because it teaches managers the importance of looking into people’s motivations. Too often managers treat people as if there are no external forces driving them.