Recently, in Lahore, I ran into an old friend who is now a ‘Management Consultant’, and does workshops on “Personal Excellence” and the like. Since he is an Engineer by profession and I’m a Psychiatrist, this felt like an invasion of my professional turf. He assured me laughingly that he had no such intention.

It turns out that after almost thirteen years working at a large multinational engineering firm, he had attended a workshop conducted by a consulting firm. He was so impressed (and probably so tired of the corporate treadmill) that he immediately began learning more, eventually quitting his full time job to become a home based trainer. He admitted, again laughingly, that his sanity had been questioned by more than one person. The concepts he described were nothing new. There was a lot of emphasis on ‘people centered management’, ‘personal growth’, ‘valuing the person as an individual’ etc. Given Pakistan’s steady industrial growth, the demand for such services is unsurprising.

However, one theory, based on the work of American Psychologist Abraham Maslow (1908-1970), would posit that these interventions would likely fall a little higher on the spectrum of human needs than the average employee in Pakistan is able or willing to accept.

Maslow’s “hierarchy of needs” theory is often depicted as a pyramid consisting of five levels: the four lower levels are grouped together as “deficiency needs”, while the top level is termed “growth needs”. While deficiency needs must be met, growth needs continually shape behavior. The basic concept is that the higher needs in this hierarchy only come into focus once all the needs that are lower down in the pyramid are satisfied.

In general, the lowest hierarchy belongs to physiological needs such as breathing, food, water, sleep, etc. The next level can be termed ‘safety’ needs such as security of the body, of property, employment, resources, health etc. Only after these are fulfilled can one move on to the next level of ‘love/belonging’ (consisting of friendship, family, sexual intimacy etc), then to the ‘esteem’ level ( self esteem, achievement, respect for self and others) and finally the apex of the pyramid, ‘self actualization’, which may include things such as creativity, morality, spontaneity, lack of prejudice, problem solving etc. This last level can also be termed ‘growth needs’ or ‘spiritual needs’.

A cursory glance at society in Pakistan would suggest that most people are struggling to fulfill their safety needs and perhaps moving towards love/belonging. If anything, the last few years have seen a regression of most people’s needs towards safety, as anyone who has had a cell phone snatched at gun point or had their home invaded can confirm. To expect the average worker in Pakistan to appreciate the higher level needs may be a bit premature.

I was also interested, as a student of human behavior, in the individual motivations of my friend. What would drive a person to give up a secure, well paying job and strike out on an uncertain, though perhaps more exciting future?

To answer this question, one can look at the work of another pioneer in Psychology, Erik Erikson (1902 – 1994) a German developmental psychologist and psychoanalyst known for his theory on social development. Erikson’s best known work is his theory of the eight stages of development, spanning the entire lifespan.

A complete discussion of every stage is beyond the scope of this brief article. Suffice to say that Erikson theorizes that each stage of life, from infancy to old age is marked by specific conflicts, or challenges, that must be successfully resolved for the person to grow and mature psychologically. Failing this, a person is ‘arrested’ or ‘stuck’ at that particular stage and may grow frustrated and embittered.

As an example, the very first stage, labeled by Erickson as “Oral-Sensory”, lasts roughly through a person’s first year of life. The conflict at this stage is labeled “Trust vs. Mistrust”, referring to an infant’s struggle to reconcile its conflicting images and perceptions of its primary caregiver, usually the birth-mother. At this stage, the infant must learn that the mother who feeds her and nurtures her may not be able to fulfill all its needs immediately. Learning to handle the resulting feelings of anger and frustration towards the mother is the primary challenge.

These stages can be enumerated as follows:

1. Infancy to 12 months:
a. Psychosocial crisis: Trust vs. Mistrust
b. Main question asked: Is my environment trustworthy or not?

2. Younger Years (1-3 years)
a. Psychosocial crisis: Autonomy vs. Shame and doubt
b. Main question asked: Do I need help from others or not?

3. Early Childhood: (3-5 years)
a. Psychosocial crisis: Initiative vs. Guilt
b. Main question asked: How moral am I?

4. Middle Childhood (6-10 years)
a. Psychosocial crisis: Industry vs. Inferiority
b. Main question asked: Am I good at what I do?

5. Adolescence: (11- 18 years)
a. Psychosocial crisis: Identity vs. Role confusion
b. Main question asked: Who am I and what is my goal in life?


6. Early Adulthood: (18- 34 years)
a. Psychosocial crisis: Intimacy vs. Isolation
b. Main question asked: Can I give and receive love?

7. Middle Adulthood: (35-60 years)
a. Psychosocial crisis :Generativity vs. Stagnation
b. Main question asked: Will I ever accomplish anything useful?

8. Later Adulthood: (60 years to death)
a. Psychosocial crisis: Ego integrity vs. Despair
b. Main question asked: Has my life been worth it?

Erikson’s research reveals how each individual must learn to hold both extremes of each specific life-stage challenge in tension with one another, not rejecting one end of the tension or the other.

To return to my friend, using this framework as a reference, one can theorize that he would be at the cusp of stages 6/7. Since he is married, with a family, he has presumably met and resolved the challenge of intimacy and love relationships and is now grappling with the issue of “generativity vs. stagnation”.

Between the ages of 35 to 60, people will find themselves "responsible for maintaining the world." Their world has settled into a permanent career, life partner, family etc. They are expected to give of themselves to maintain this and the larger world. This is a new and often times daunting task. Like all psycho-social crises, flexibility and adaptation are essential in successful resolution. This stage is also the preparation for the ‘final act’ as it were, the last stage of psychological maturity where a person takes stock of their life, feels content about what one has achieved and prepares for one’s exit from the world.

The term ‘mid-life crisis’ also denotes an attempt to resolve this stage successfully. After having worked hard to make a career, start a family etc, one may start asking oneself ‘Is this all there is?’ This can be healthy if it leads to introspection resulting in a person shaking off old, outmoded ways of thinking, embarking on new challenges and growing psychologically. It can also be a source of distress if one indulges in impulsive career changes, extra marital affairs or other self-destructive behaviors.

As far as I could see, my friend seemed happy and enthusiastic about his new career. Most people who find themselves in similar position would likely not take the major leap of faith he has. However, this does not, in and of itself, signify mental pathology or impaired judgment. On the contrary, such counterintuitive decisions can often lead to personal and professional growth and at the very least provide a person with a learning experience that can help them face subsequent challenges productively. If he has planned well, he may do just as well in his ‘second career’ and in fact, as a society, we can all benefit from challenging conventional ways of thinking and behaving to overcome some of the obstacles facing us as a nation.