7/29/2019 ALDERFER

1/2

ALDERFERs ERG THEORYSerious doubts have been expressed about the existence of the five distinct need categories,

which Maslow hypothesized. There seems to be some overlapping between esteem, social, and

physiological needs. Also, the lines between esteem, social, and self-actualization needs are not

entirely clear. With these points in mind, Clayton Alderfer condensed Maslows five need

categories into three sets:

(i) Existence need: these include all forms of material and physiological and safety needs. i.e.,

Maslows first two level needs.

(ii) Relatedness need: this includes all needs that involve relationships with other people wecare about. Thus, the opposite of satisfaction or relatedness needs is emotional distance rather

than hatred. Relatedness needs cover Maslows social needs and that of esteem needs which are

derived from other people.

(iii) Growth need: these needs involve persons making creative efforts to achieve full potential

in the existing environment. It is like Maslows last level need of self-actualization.

Alderfer also revised Maslows theory in three other ways:

(a) He argued that the three need categories form a hierarchy only in the sense of decreasing

concreteness. That is, as we move from, a focus on existence to relatedness to growth needs, theways we can satisfy those needs become increasingly abstract.

(b) He recognized that rise in the level of satisfaction of our existence and relatedness needs may

result in decrease concreteness. That is, as we move from, a focus on existence to relatedness to

growth needs, the ways we can satisfy those needs become increasingly abstract.

(c) He reasoned that we are likely to try to first satisfy out most concrete needs and then we tend

to move on to more abstract needs. in this sense, Alderfer sounds somewhat like Maslow,

suggesting a pattern of satisfaction progression-that is, if we cant satisfy needs at a given level

of abstractness, we drop back and again focus on more concrete needs. Thus, if we are unable

to satisfy out growth needs, we again focus on relatedness needs; we can go through cycles,moving from a focus on one need, then another, and then back again.

Alderfer conceived of ERG needs along a continuum which avoids the implication that the

higher up an individual is in the hierarchy the better it is. Different types on needs can operate

simultaneously. If a particular path towards the satisfaction is blocked, the individual will both

persist along that path and at the same time regress towards more easily satisfied needs. In this

way, Alderfer distinguishes between chronic needs, which persist over a period of time, and the

7/29/2019 ALDERFER

2/2

episode needs, which are situational and can change according to the environment. Alderfers

work gives up a sound basis to categories of human needs and to think about the relationship

between need categories.

Comparison and contrast with Maslow theory:

There are some similarities as well as dissimilarities between Alderfers ERG theory and

Maslows theory of Need Hierarchy, which are as follows:

(a) Similarities: (i) both are content theories; (ii) the basic needs emphasized in both are the

same; (iii) the overall structure of need categories is also the same; Alderfer has grouped further

the five needs enunciated by Maslow; and (iv) both deal with upward movement of motivation

according to the hierarchy.

(b) Dissimilarities: (i) Maslows main contention is hierarchy of needs, whereas Alderferfocused more on a continuum of needs than their hierarchical levels; (ii) thus, ERG needs do notmaintain sharp lines of demarcation; (iii) unlike Maslow,l Alderfer also envisaged downward

movement in the hierarchy. In his opinion, there can be not only satisfaction progression but

frustration regression as well; and (iv) Alderfer also recognized the influence of a mans personalbackground and his natural environment. Accordingly, related needs may in some cases take

precedence over existence needs.

Merits of Alderfers theory:

(i) Alderfers concept of needs is more direct and simple to understand; (ii) it is more flexible

and therefore, more realistic. In the words of Fred Luthans, most contemporary analyses ofwork motivation tend to support Alderfers theory over Maslows; (iii) the provision of

backlash of fulfillment of a need accords with reality; and (iv) there is a specific method

indicated in the theory for its testing and validation.

Criticism of Alderfers theory:

The fact that the needs are not strictly demarcated goes against the theory. Probably this is one of

the important reasons for lack of popularity of Alderfers theory. The term relatedness used in

the theory is particularly confusing; and like other content theories, it fails to contribute

effectively to human resources management.