The Theme of Maslowian Self Actualization - Essay Example

Maslowian ‘Self-Actualisation’ ‘Self-actualisation’ refers to the achievement of what one considers their optimum level of personal or professional development. The theory is useful to organisations particularly in human resource management since it applies humanist psychology to an otherwise impersonal organisational entity. Given that organisations are made up of individuals, this theory has been found both applicable and practical in studying the various motivational factors that are inherently connected with organisational performance. To many people, the connection between self-actualisation and the “Maslowian” theories of motivation are straightforward concepts, which can be summed up as action and reward scenarios. However, under the light of incisive consideration, the matter emerges as a highly intricate interconnection where the motivational factors are seen as more personal and less dependent on extrinsic rewards contrary to popular assumptions. The simplicity of intrinsic vs. extrinsic is disqualified under the assumption that in a HR context, the motivation of employees is inherently intrinsic based on the desired of individuals to develop their professional and by extension personal and deed seated desired for fulfilment. This paper examines the notion of self-actualisation in contemporary HRM where it is widely regarded as an objective in itself outside the rest of the needs in Maslow’s pyramid. Consequently, employees are encouraged to strive for the perfection underpinned in self-actualisation to draw intrinsic motivation from their desire to achieve the unachievable. People tend to define their worth not as employees but individuals based on their ability to perform in their various tasks (Jim, 2006). Therefore, in HR, self-actualisation is more than just reward as payment or reward for the actual production but rather for the internal effort and self-production, which is always there to motivate the employees with a promise of reward for positivity. The traditional notion of rewards in terms of promotions is transcended by a powerful drive and self-reward that one gives himself/herself after the successful completion of a task. HRM discourse looks at one’s career as a means through which they try to fulfil their potential and they reinforce these efforts by trying to answer questions such as “What is my true self?”, “What can I accomplish?”, “What am I doing with my life?” When one seeks to answer such questions, they are well on their way to interior motivation and reward. HRM directly and indirectly promises employees growth and progress opportunities to help them answer the questions mentioned above and fulfil themselves rather than just engage in the drudgery of day-to-day labour. The underlying message by HRM in their attempts to recruit and motivate staff is actually a veiled threat that challenges their competence and capabilities. It is not unlike a used car sales person that tries to convince a potential customer of the good attributes of their product and tries to make them guilty for not buying it since they will be losing out. How could you fail to be successful, creative or innovative they ask? After all, these are the attributes that every employee is supposed to have in order to win any of the material and career rewards that come with their job (Costea, 2014a). These notions engender a culture of positivity driving employees to engage in their work not as characters doing it for the reward, but to view their job as means to self-expression and realisition (Jim, 2006). One believes that they have the potential to be the best at what they do and in this mind-set, the job will simply appear as a tool through which they can actualise. On the other hand, money and other rewards will serve two key purposes; according to Maslow, one cannot pursue the top level of the pyramid unless all the others have been met. Among the roles of HRM is to ensure that employees are willing to dedicate themselves to their job without distraction (Costea, 2014a). Therefore, they ensure to cater to all the lower needs through proving comfortable salary allowances privileges when applicable and promotions for self-esteem. This way, the employee can focus on actualising, which ultimately maximises productivity or effectiveness for the firm. In this context, institutions can be viewed as a promise of opportunities for perpetual improvement and growth (Shenhav, 1999). The employee works for the company, but given they are trying to become the best, they are also working for themselves and when HRM is effective in motivating and providing them with the lower needs, they can be guaranteed maximum and perpetual effort. The second value of financial rewards can also be connected to the Maslow pyramid, as esteem need (Mottaghipour and Bickerton, 2005). The salary one earns is ideally not seen as the sum of their success, but rather a means of keeping score. It encourages short-term competition in the process of pursuing the more complex and long-term actualisation. HRM uses the concept of self-realisition so completely that it develops a notion of creating freedom in work. The underlying assumption here is that work will free one from the constraints of life and provide them with something to live for (Shenhav, 1999). They strive, not just to achieve organisational objectives, but also personal ones, which involve defining themselves through their dedication and performance of their various duties. The idea of work freeing, one retrospectively appeared on the gates of many labour camps under the promise that concentration of all or ones strengths allows one to find inner freedom. Ironically, this involves pursuing the freedom even if it means that one will completely disregard their personal life. Nietzsche refers to performance management as mnemotechnics (Costea, 2014a) since it uses the retrospective failure, fear, or failure and uses them to reinforce work centric behaviours (Murphie, 2004). It makes the employees realise that they may never be able to live up to their potential and consequently inspires them to work harder in order to get close to the illusion of actualisation. HRMs have used Abraham Maslow’s need for self-actualisation to inspire dedication in people despite the fact that it bespeaks a painful reality of an objective that can never be attained. Actualisation is a notion based on infinite possibilities and it brings to mind utopic ideals of perpetual happiness, bliss and success (Costea, 2014b). However, these are impossible to achieve as described, but it does not stop people from striving to go as far as possible in the realm of their finite possibility to achieve infinity of actualisation. HRM uses the essence of what Heelas refers to as ethics of self-work; he argues that the self in this context should not be understood as implied by a consumer culture but as the individual in his or her own estimation of himself. The self-actualisation is a self that needs to enrich itself by working to further personal growth, in this context work can be seen as a means to a variety of therapeutic ends (Heelas, 2002). He is essentially implying that the internal dynamic of self-worth which is underpinned by the human belief that they are always worth more than they presently have or in comparison with their friends and colleagues. People do not only want to own and control wealth that is more material but also want to have it in bigger quantities than those around them since everyone’s sense of self-worth is based on a desired to satisfy the insatiable actualisation drive. HRM therefore uses this to encourage the staff to perform better by creating scenarios where they ask why is their work not challenging enough or why they are not making as much as other people. Simply people want to get more recognition for their permanently increasing sense of self-worth and this will only be achieved if they are perpetually working harder and possibly longer. HRM encourages employees to always attempt to better themselves, which is analogous to telling them to find the end of a 360-degree circle. There will always be space for movement and there may be visible shorter destinations, but in the end, there is no ending to this circle unless one either drops out or changes their ambition, which might just as well put them in a different circle. The connection that binds self-actualisation and performance is not a clear one since they are in reality very divergent constructs. However, HRM makes these appear to be moments of liberation where people stop working simply to be paid, but rather to fulfil their destiny. HRM applies various motivational theories in the endeavour to resolve the doubts of work into a form of realisition that may be perceived a route to actualisation (Costea, 2014b). Workers are perpetually confused and cannot find the link between what they can actually do and what they are capable of, they strive for protection oblivious to the impossibility of this given their imperfect nature. This confusion disconnects the work from reality and it tries to turn someone into the work they do. People define themselves by their professional and academic qualification, the content of their CV is seen as more important than their nature as humans (Maclagan, 2003). All this is under the assumption that hard work and innovation can result in one realising their personal destiny and actualising therefore placing themselves at the top of Maslow’s pyramid. Contemporary scholars have sought to understand the attraction of the Maslow pyramid to HRM scholars and practitioners over the years given that there is hardly a text on the subject that does not include the diagram (Costea, 2014b). Many have found that the ideas of the psychologist have been so much integrated into theory that the person himself appears to have faded into oblivion in the shadow of his invention. For many, the original significance of the diagram is unknown and it is only understood as a tool through which employee motivation can be understood but most importantly controlled and improved. For HRM, Maslow has been replaced by something which appears to be more important than anything else he may have stood for which is the tiny bit at the top of the pyramid (Maclagan, 2003). HRM has developed a new culture from the self-actualisation model and it has become common by line for managerial communities in motivating their staffs. People have venerated the top train to such an extent that critics sometimes see it as the representation of secular divinity in which individuals imagine can be found in it. Maslow introduced the utopic notion of human perception and fulfilment in a scientific platform and made it appear logical and this gave rise to the idea of positive people management (Kremer & Hammond, 2013). Production of goods and provision of services gradually came to be critiqued under the presupposition that they could always get better. Customers were taught to expect and demand excellence, perfection, and companies used it as a competitive edge with each advertising itself as the perfect source of consumer solutions. People began to seek out perfection in every aspect of life including their own performance and HRM seized on this hope to channel the pursuit for perfection into intrinsic and perpetual motivation (Živković, Mihajlović, Prvulović, 2009). However, the disadvantage is that there is no perfection within human power; consequently, the fixation of performativity with total human perfection results into a system where people are ever striving to achieve more than they are capable of. HRM uses various parameters to guide and direct employees as well as keep them in check through total quality management where the subject rather than the activity itself is the basis on which performance is evaluated. This focus on the individual subject further emphasis the ideal of self-actualisation since people are constantly being expected to improve themselves so that these improvements can reflect on the product of their labour. In the end, evaluation and assessments systems are structured in such a way that they can bridge the ultimate result of the work effort with personal participation making it impossible to divorce ones effort from their job (Peters, 2010). Consequently, employees stand the risk of losing their autonomy and the line between their definition of themselves as persons and professionals gradually blurs before it disappears altogether. This can explain why many people dedicate so much time to their work and neglect their families, health social life among other personal factors in the quest to achieve the elusive and self-actualisation which in invariably out of reach. One is expected to perform to their full range of personal qualities and this rather than their specialised professional skill. The imperatives of creativity and knowledge creations have become HRM bywords with people being judged based on how creative or innovative they can be and to what extent this benefits the organisations. Once again, the unlimited scope covered by imagination means that they can always get better and HRM will encourage and motivate staff to improve their performance constantly. Like the notion of self- actualisation, innovation creates an opportunity for HRM to maximise the performance of employees by pushing them to explore and infinite range of possibilities. Although this creativity is essentially a personal attribute, the individual will use it to improve the company since they are inherently a part of it although the opposite does not apply. In the end, HRM serves its purposes by convincing people that they need to focus on a masterpiece prototype or a perfect life on organisations. The only expectation is that one must constantly do more and improve themselves, which automatically translates into improving the organisation. The organisational culture always expects that one will have more in the future and they must constantly work even when they get to this point since it is a never-ending circle. However, paradoxically, this pursuit for excellence is challenged by a factor that is known to both the individual and the organisations or which they work (Peters, 2010). The fact that one will always fall short of expectations and that they can never be perfect, HRM keeps reminding employees of this but most importantly the individual is constantly aware that even as they strive to be perfect it is not possible. This is the basis on which HRM finds equilibrium for its management practices, through numerous series of performance appraisals; it seeks to indicate the imperfections at each stage of the individual’s professional growth and development. Coupled with the human tendency for self-criticism since people tend to be permanently dissatisfied and seeking to improve their performance HRM will likely continue to get the maximum out of staffs that are made venerable by their pursuit for actualisation (Costea, 2014a). In conclusion, it is evident that Maslow’s self-actualisation has indeed become a core feature of HRM practices; however, as aforementioned, the tradition understanding of the theory has been radically changed centring it on the top level. References 1. Costea, B., 2014a. The Origins and Cultural Vitality of “Human Resource Management”. Lecture 2. Costea, B. 2014b. Performance and Perfection: Longing for ‘MySelf’ – cultural compensation in HRM (the ‘Maslowian Thing’) Understanding the performative turn – Part IV. Lecture 9 3. Heelas, P., 2002. Work ethics, soft capitalism and the “turn to life”. Cultural economy, pp. 78-96. 4. Jim, C., 2006. Good to great and the social sectors: a monograph to accompany good to great in Jim Collins, Good To Great: Why Some Companies Make the Leap... and Others Don’t, 1st ed New York. Random House Business, 2001. 5. Kremer, W., Hammond, C., 2013. Abraham Maslow and the pyramid that beguiled business. BBC News Magazine [online] Available at: http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-23902918 [accessed 25 Dec. 2014]. 6. Maclagan, P., 2003. Self‐actualisation as a moral concept and the implications for motivation in organisations: a Kantian argument. Business ethics: A European review, 12(4), pp. 334-342. 7. Mottaghipour, Y., Bickerton, A., 2005. The Pyramid of Family Care: A framework for family involvement with adult mental health services. Advances in Mental Health, 4(3), pp. 210-217. 8. Murphie, A., 2004. Differential life, perception and the nervous elements: whitehead, Bergson and virno on the technics of living. Culture Machine, 7. 9. Peters, T.J., 2010. The little big things: 163 ways to pursue excellence. New York. HarperCollins, 2010. 10. Shenhav, Y.A., 1999. Manufacturing rationality: The engineering foundations of the managerial revolution. p. 58. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 11. Živković, Ž., Mihajlović, I., Prvulović, S., 2009. Developing motivation model as a strategy for HRM in small enterprises under transitional economy. Serbian Journal of Management, 4(1), pp. 1-27. Read More