Nothing more than feelings?

The late Margaret Thatcher, Prime Minister of the U.K. from 1979 to 1990, was once quoted as saying, “People don't think anymore, they feel.” While there was a political connotation attached to the meaning of this quote, it is very apropos in the context of how we have evolved in our social and interpersonal relationships.

With all of the multimedia we are blasted with on a continual basis, the line of delineation between what we are or are not paying attention to is less a matter of fact (truth versus fallacy) and more a matter of emotion. Virility, hormonal supplements and abs that you could use as an ironing board are the things we are told will give us that enhanced feeling of self-confidence, also known as self-esteem.

In the 1940s, psychologist and humanist Abraham Maslow, developed a theory called the Needs Hierarchy. This theory concluded that similar to other species, humans had the basic needs of food, shelter and acceptance. Maslow categorized these needs as 1) physical, 2) safety and 3) love/acceptance.

According to him, humans, however, are the only species to understand the efficacy of two additional levels of needs: 4) self-esteem and 5) self-actualization. In addition, to progress from the level of physical needs to the safety needs, to the needs of love/acceptance and so on, the needs of the preceding level must first be met before the individual would be motivated to continue onto the next level.

The Effect

Now that I have laid the foundation of where I am coming from in terms of self-esteem, let’s see if we can tie this to how it affects our abilities and motivations for training and learning.

Self-esteem can affect attitudes, expectations, decisions and performance. It can also affect decision making, allowing emotions to influence critical thinking, hence the adage: If it feels good, then just do it. Not exactly what Thatcher and Maslow had in mind in regard to advancing the human condition of wants versus needs.

I read in a textbook a simple question the authors asked which describes the impetus behind wants versus needs: Why do people do what they do to get what they want?

The lowest common denominator in the wants versus the needs of an individual is where Maslow identified the five levels of the needs hierarchy – physical, safety, acceptance, self-esteem and self-actualization – as natural successive steps. Likewise, Thatcher made a simpler juxtaposition in how people are guided by wants (feelings) versus needs (thinking).

Wants

In organizational learning theory, what an individual may be motivated to want, in most instances, is not fulfilled unless an associative need is satisfied. Or at least that is how it is supposed to work. For example, wanting a management position in an organization does not happen just because someone thinks they deserve it.

There are prerequisite needs of fulfillment, such as training, education and experience as stepping stones toward being a manager. However, with an equity-based mindset that is permeating throughout our social and organizational strata, there is a stark chasm developing between motivation and achievement that is being driven by people’s wants supplanting their needs.

A great example of this can be found in the proliferation of for-profit higher education institutions. A generation ago, the standards of ACT and SAT scores were a bare minimum requirement to gain admittance into even a community college, let alone a state or private university.

In addition, to apply for graduate school, you earned admission through the LSATS and GSA tests, plus minimum undergraduate GPA standards, that determined your entrance into a master’s or doctorate program. If your scores were not up to it, oh well, better luck next time.

Deserve

So what is it like today? Just write a single-page essay (writing proficiencies optional) on why you deserve a graduate degree, and have a good credit score to get saddled with tens of thousands of dollars in student loans, and you’re in. Can you hear that tap-tap-tapping into the Thatcher-Maslow intersection of how feelings and self-esteem (wants versus needs) is making our learning and achievement decisions for us?

As an adjunct professor for 10 years at a for-profit university, I saw this happen time and time again. The wheels of a quality education were falling off the wagon in lieu of the skids of quarterly corporate profits and false promises of better self-confidence and career advancement. All to help you swallow that bitter pill of enough looming debt to buy a vacation condominium.

Unfortunately, however, this equity-based mindset of wants (deserving a degree) versus needs (earning a degree) does not stop at the ivy-covered walls of higher learning. It is an attitude that is oozing into the workplace where feelings eventually meet up with reality.

Using the Chance Cards of a Monopoly game as a metaphor: It will be less of “Advance to St. Charles Place – if you pass Go, collect $200” and more like “Go back 3 spaces.”

For companies and organizations to avoid an equity-based expectation pitfall, they need to have clear and concise standards for career advancement. If these standards do not exist, individuals will form a false psychological contract (list of expectations and goals) of their role in the organization and how they can formulate shortcuts based on their wants versus their needs.

Training and education is a benefit, not a right. To avoid the misconceptions of wants versus needs, be clear that training and education is earned and not conferred. 

Paul Ulasien is president and senior partner of Business Training Consultants (www.biztrainingconsult.com). The company provides innovative and effective training strategies based on Social Learning Theory that strives to stimulate individual learning retention and then shares what has been learned to individuals throughout the social fabric of the organization. Ulasien has more than 30 years of experience in training consulting and education. He serves on the Advisory Panel of Faulkner Information Services, a provider of IT and communications information services; has been an adjunct professor of graduate business studies; and holds dual master’s degrees in business administration and industrial-organizational psychology.