How did Abraham Maslow’s humanistic approach to management influence later theories of motivation? Explore the influence of Maslow in the works of two more recent management theorists.
Introduction
Born in 1908 in New York, Abraham Maslow was one the most influential humanistic psychologist of his time. As a humanistic psychologist, he held great belief that psychology should be based entirely on the individual and his actions (Udechukwe 2009). The basis of his humanistic approach was formed on the assumption that every single person is inherently good-natured. This very basis later manifested in the area of management theory and which, he later coined the humanistic approach as ‘eypsychian’.
Motivation can be broadly defined as ‘the process whereby goal-directed activity is instigated and sustained’ (Pintrich & Schunk 2002). For a employee, the goal-directed activity gives them a reason to work towards a certain direction and in most instances, closely connected to his or her emotions (Freemantle 2001). Scientifitic school of thoughts have always considered monetary incentive to be the only effective motivator to employees. However, humanistic theorists strongly critised this view. They categorized monetary incentives as external motivators and therefore, only a mere extrinsic factor that motives employees (John & Saks 2008). In other words, money can be an effective motivator but its effect is very much limited.
Humanistic Views of Motivation
As opposed to scientifitic approaches, the humanistic approach argues from a less materialistic angle and ascertain that there are non-emprical forces that motivates an individual. Maslow was not the first to adopt the humanistic approach to management theory. However his theory was one of the most influential of his time( ). In fact, later theories of management showed traces of Maslow’s influence and built on the foundation that Maslow has laid out.
Maslow’s Hierarchy