Maslow’s theory of needs in individualistic and collectivist cultures Malika Kassymova Essay

1. Abstract Maslows hierarchy of needs is a motivation scheme elaborated by a mercifulistic psychologist Abraham Maslow in 1943. Maslows theory consists of 5 briny levels of needs that form a pyramid Physiological, Safety, Belongingness and Love, Esteem, Self-Actualization (Janet A. Simons, 1987). Even though this theory is most commonly used in various(prenominal)istic cultures, some findings provoke that it may also be applied in leftist culture. However, the results result differ from those in individualistic cultures. In a left-winger culture, the canonical need is belonging to the rules of order self-esteem is eliminated, and self-actualization is attained in foothold of meeting societal development needs (Gambrel, P. A.& Cianci, R., 2003). Thus, contrary to the belief that the base excogitation of self-actualisation applies to any human being in any culture, the flow findings suggest that an individuals needs are partially articled by culture. Implications include important impact on the workplace, as the concept of self-actualization shouldnt be forced upon a collectivist culture and misdeed versa (Nevis, 1983).2. Introduction 2.1 Review Most famous authors that have investigated international implications of Maslows hierarchy of needs include Geert Hofstede, Edwin C. Nevis. Other individualism-collectivism studies by Hampden-Turner and Trompenaars, Schwartz, Bilsky, Ivtzan and Tanaka have a direct relation to theories of motivation as well.2.2 PurposeThe purpose of this publications review is to organise, compare and synthesize academic papers related to the Maslows theory of motivation and to indicate the sources of obtained data.3. Application of Maslows theory in individualistic and collectivist cultures 3.1 Beginning of studies Individualism collectivism is one of quaternary dimensions of culture in different countries actual by Geert Hofstede. According to (Hofstede, guinea pig Cultures in Four Dimensions, 1983), in an individua listic companionship individuals look aft(prenominal) themselves and immediate family members. He defines collectivism as a preference for a c lose social framework where family members and other in-group members look after them in exchange for loyalty individualism, on the contrary, refers to a more self-oriented approach to socialization. 3.2 methodology & FindingsSource www.geert-hofstede.com In a recent study (Ivtzan, 2010) the cultural rigourousness of self-actualization is time-tested using the Personal Orientation Inventory (POI) questionnaire developed by (Shostrom, E.L, 1980) as a ecumenical measure of the self-actualizing characteristics originally highlighted by Maslow. The POI questionnaire was tested on 100 British participants and 100 Indian participants as these 2 cultures belong to 2 different cultures (Hofstede, geert-hofstede.com, 2004). In support of the hypothesis, the results showed British participants scored importantly higher than the Indian participan ts on 10 out of the 12 scales, moment that Individuals from an individualistic culture are more likely to be ambient to the self-actualizing ideal, as measured by these scales, than individuals from a collectivist culture.Thus, ones cognition and motivation are affected by the social musical arrangement in which they are raised and fulfilling ones potential is expressed differently in these cultures. Collectivistic cultures are more other orientated with strong emphasis on approval, acceptance and adherence to social groups (Erez & Earley, 1993). In support of this, Tanaka (1978) tested individualistic and collectivistic differences in agreeable responses to mingled behavioural statements. For example, in response to the statement To do something good for society, participants from Indonesia, Pakistan and India scored the highest and those from Australia and New Zealand the lowest.However, in response to the statement To achieve personal comfort, the pattern of results was r eversed. Similarly, Riesman et al (1953) describe that the other-directed person hardly thinks of himself as an individual (p.33) further suggesting that collectivists that define themselves in such an other-directed way are slight likely to be inner orientated than individualists. Therefore, prestigious companies such as Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS, 2007) that actively use Maslows motivational theory may fail to effectively reach out their more collectivist employees. Source www.geert-hofstede.com4. Summary Hofstede (1983) and Nevis (1983) both conclude that the hierarchy of needs developed by Maslow stresses individual achievement rather than collective, since it was developed on the rump of individualistic US sticker. However, Hofstede (1983) and Trompenaars (1993) agree that the American way of instruction does non apply across all cultures, especially as those in Asia. vivification to our fullest potential is a universal theme and the route towards unlocking this potentia l and fulfilling it energy be dependent on our cultural values. Therefore, the results of using Maslows model will differ in individualist and collectivist cultures. Further enquiry is needed to establish whether the fulfilment of the individual in a non-Western, collectivistic culture is idealised in a different way (Ivtzan, I., Gardner, H. E., Bernard, I., Sekhon, M., & Hart, R., 2013).5. Implications for Managers individualistic countries desiring to invest in collectivist countries (e.g. China) can increase their profitability through and through understanding of collectivist culture and vice versa. Companies where management models are establish on individualism shouldnt force their management practices upon a collectivist environs. For example, in a collectivist culture like China, Nevis (1983) suggests that Chinese agate line practices should be governed by being a good member of society and placing group needs before individual needs. Therefore, a team-based organization al anatomical structure should be put in place by the investing firm.The human resource management design should also design a benefits plan that centres on the work group with a focus on housing, medical checkup care, and education. Cultural research is important in human resource management in order to divide between individualistic and collectivistic cultures, allowing both to work efficiently and effectively, side by side, in the same organisational environment (Ivtzan, I., Gardner, H. E., Bernard, I., Sekhon, M., & Hart, R., 2013). Also, the human resource management plan should implement a comprehensive cultural training program designed to increase understanding and knowingness of a collectivist culture to avoid confrontations and situations that would cause one to lose face (Gambrel, P. A.& Cianci, R., 2003).