Maslow's hierarchy of needs was birthed by Abraham Maslow in a 1943 paper, A Theory of Human Motivation, which he later extended and expanded in numerous publications. He formulated a "ladder" of human motivations (a.k.a. needs) and his theory contended that as the basic needs are met, humans naturally are urged or pulled towards "higher" needs.

Much has changed since 1943, not just in our society but also in the arena of human motivation. After many years of teaching and research, being a personal psychotherapist for over ten years, and enjoying over twenty-five years of as a professor and researcher of human development and learning it has become obvious to me that there is a need for some serious revamping of motivation theory, if it is to be relevant to current times. As a result, in 2006, I introduced a new motivation concept in the form of "Movers" and more particularly, Prime Movers, the basic essence of human activity.

We are much more complex now. In 1943 we were still in the throes of World War II, and the lower needs of security and physical needs were prevailing, making it natural for motivation studies to be so focused. The higher needs were couched in such a way they seen almost as a luxury — as if they were something most humans were to strive for if they ever achieved a fortunate level of life.

Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs

Maslow's Hierarchy was good for its time. There were lower needs (Deficiency Needs that were always "running dry" and had to be filled up again, much like a gas tank on your car) and higher needs (Growth Needs that transformed the individual permanently).

According to Maslow, an individual is naturally and internally urged to act upon the growth needs if and only if the deficiency needs are met. Maslow's initial conceptualization included only one growth need, that of self-actualizing. Self-actualizing is usually written as a gerund (with an "ing") since it is legitimately a process not a Stage. When people are in the arena of self-actualizing they are characterized by:

1. being problem-focused;
2. possess a constant blossoming freshness of appreciation for life;
3. a concern about personal growth; and,
4. the ability to have peak experiences.

Maslow later differentiated the growth need of self-actualizing, specifically naming two lower-level growth needs just below general level of self-actualization (Maslow & Lowery, 1998) and another above it (Maslow, 1971). They were

5. Cognitive: to know, to understand, and explore;
6. Aesthetic: symmetry, order, and beauty;
7. Self-actualization: to find self-fulfillment and continue to realize one's layers of potential; and,
8. Self-transcendence: to connect to something beyond the ego or to help others find self-fulfillment and realize their potential.

Maslow's basic position is that as one becomes more self-actualizing and self-transcending, the more one develops wisdom (automatically knowing what to do in a wide variety of situations). Daniels (2001) suggests that Maslow's ultimate conclusion that the highest levels of self-actualizing are transcendent in their nature may be one of his most important contributions to the study of human behavior and motivation.

The 12 Prime Movers

I have postulated that the world of humans is more complex and human needs are, due to the families they are born into, often starting at a higher level and/or spending less time in the lower needs. People's lives have become more differentiated in the process of this upgrading caused by the explosive evolution of civilization, and it is past time to also upgrade the way we look at what makes people tick, or do what they do and why they do it.

I am also proposing that humans have more needs, or motivators , but there is a limit: only 12 basic motivations are available, whether currently active or in latent form. These fundamental needs, I label Prime Movers. Whether some of the higher levels (nearer to the self-actualizing/transcending end of the spectrum) manifest in an individual's life will be determined by "education" in the broadest sense, i.e., being exposed to models, situations, and instruction that unleash the latency and manifest the motivation or Prime Movers.

The reasons any person moves rather than remains stationary are limited to twelve — it is misleading to think there are only seven or eight basic needs. People are much more complex now, and not near as hierarchical, as in a ladder or the stacking of floors in a tall building.

Not only do I propose the 12 Prime Movers but I also believe that people often confuse style with motivation. I separate out the "modes of delivery" of the Prime Movers, as they are often confused with the Prime Movers themselves. Modes of delivering, or exhibiting, behavior are individualized by each person and may be known as a Personal Style. These are learned means of expressing one's motivations or Prime Movers, and are largely a matter of enculturated experience that has become habituated.

Some call Personal Style "values." Values seem to influence people greatly in conversation and writing, but in essence it is the Prime Movers that are the tectonic plates of our existence. Personal Style (values) are much like a tray that carries a vital substance (like food) or Prime Mover (PM). It is easy to get caught up in people's personal styles and never see what is underneath in the form of a Prime Mover. Values are not, as some assume, basic needs or actions. Values are the means of feeling and expressing one's Prime Movers.

Comparing the Dallmann-Jones Prime Mover Theory with Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs

I agree to a point with Maslow in that the "lower" needs have priority over the "higher" needs, but only up to the continua of Self-Esteem. Once you reach the Prime Mover of Self-Esteem there is no hierarchy. If you had to have a model, an arrangement of the remaining PMs in a circle would be more accurate.

That thing we call LIFE relates to motility, or movement, of some sort, derives from the Primary Question (usually unspoken, and many times beyond awareness) for all human beings in every second of consciousness: "What am I going to do with my energy next?" A particular Prime Mover answers the Prime Question. Location on the continua (in the chart represented briefly as an arrow) determines the strength of the Prime Mover. Personal Style answers how the Prime Mover will be colored (expressed) in appearance.

The simple sequence is:

Status quo‑> Need arises‑> Style chosen‑> Behavior to satisfy need‑> Need satisfied‑> Status quo returns

Why Bother?

Clarity, plain and simple, is the reason for rewriting motivation history. And accuracy. Clarity and accuracy in achieving the goal of controlling of people or being able to control their outcomes has always dominated motivation theory. This is not as Machiavellian as it sounds. To help one understand what is making them behave in a certain way enlightens them to where they are, what they need to do next, and prevents possible confusion on satisfying that need.

For teachers, I would think it crucial to understand Prime Movers. Personally, utilizing Prime Mover Theory, I can sit in a classroom for a few minutes and, just by watching children's actions — both verbal and body language — explain why certain kids are behaving the way they are. Now wouldn't that help a teacher — to be able to reach children where they are and lead them to more fruitful pursuits? You have to know what a need/motivator is before you can directly address it. You need to really see it to determine if it can be fulfilled, liberating the child to move on. Here is the fundamental principle of motivation theory that most teachers, and many parents, still have not learned: If you address the wrong motive only confusion, frustration, contradiction or deception happens. Worse: all four.

By taking time to diagnose where another person is coming from makes for a meaningful conversation, no matter what the topic, and makes problem-solving a possibility. When you catch on to this insightful way of understanding where a person is coming from, you look back and realize how you have probably been an idiot in half your conversations in the past. I am almost kidding. It is such a part of our patterns of human interactions that comedians constantly play off this truth of misunderstanding one another, and we all get it.

For example, the comedian says: "Take my wife — she tells me that she loves me, and I start taking off my clothes.

"She says, 'What are you doing?' and I say, 'I thought you wanted to            ?'

" 'Really?', she says sarcastically, 'Here in Walgreens?' "

How many arguments are started over misunderstanding "where the other person is coming from"? That phrase right there — "where the other person is coming from" — really means two differently motivated people are assuming they both have the same motivation while in a conversation.

In schools, this is a rampant issue. Time is wasted. Problems remain unsolved. Feelings are hurt. Confusion reigns supreme. But most of all — the worst of all — people just stop trying. They give up trying to understand out of simple frustration. Much frustration to a large extent could be avoided just by taking time to use the schema provided by the chart above to first determine a person's actual motive prior to engaging in a deep discussion.

Good counselors do this a lot with clients. Couples counselors do it constantly. Teachers could be using this to help increase efficiency and effectiveness all day long.

Notes

* Anthony Dallmann-Jones, PhD, teaches and researches in the School of Graduate Education at Marian University, north of Milwaukee, Wisconsin. He is author of several books on psychology of human development, family dysfunction, self-help and three major publications on effective teaching strategies. He is a full-time professor of master's level students in education, with a specialty in at-risk education. D^r. Dallmann-Jones also directs the National At-Risk Education Network.

SOE.MarianUniversity.edu   www.NAREN.info   director@naren.info

References

• Dallmann-Jones, A. (1998). Primary domino thinking. Fond du Lac, WI: Wolf Creek Press.
• Daniels, M. (2001). Maslow's concept of self-actualization. Retrieved February 2004, from http://www.mdani.demon.co.uk/archive/MDMaslow.htm.
• Huitt, W. (2004). Maslow's hierarchy of needs. Educational Psychology Interactive. Valdosta, GA: Valdosta State University. Retrieved [date] from, http://chiron.valdosta.edu/whuitt/col/regsys/maslow.html.
• Maslow, A. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50, 370-396. Retrieved June 2001, from http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Maslow/motivation.htm.
• Maslow, A. (1954). Motivation and personality. New York: Harper.
• Maslow, A. (1971). The farther reaches of human nature. New York: The Viking Press.
• Maslow, A., & Lowery, R. (Ed.). (1998). Toward a psychology of being (3rd ed.). New York: Wiley & Sons.

Continue to Page 2...

Copyright © 2003 Anthony Dallmann-Jones, PhD

Page 1 | Page 2 | Page 3 | Page 4

Home | About | Articles | Multimedia
Products | Services | Reviews | Contact
Follow Doc Zest on Twitter!

D^r. Zest® is a registered trademark of D^r. Anthony S. Dallmann-Jones.
All content of this web site is Copyright © Anthony Dallmann-Jones, 2009.
Unauthorized Duplication Prohibited.