Premium
Work motivation in Malawi: neither flat earth nor Babel
Author(s) -
Carr Stuart C.,
MacLachlan Malcolm
Publication year - 1999
Publication title -
journal of international development
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.533
H-Index - 66
eISSN - 1099-1328
pISSN - 0954-1748
DOI - 10.1002/(sici)1099-1328(199901/02)11:1<141::aid-jid570>3.0.co;2-y
Subject(s) - meaning (existential) , hierarchy , contradiction , blunt , identity (music) , diversity (politics) , phenomenon , epistemology , sociology , tone (literature) , maslow's hierarchy of needs , field (mathematics) , style (visual arts) , positive economics , social psychology , psychology , political science , law , aesthetics , philosophy , economics , history , linguistics , anthropology , medicine , surgery , archaeology , mathematics , pure mathematics
‘A mush of meaningless gobbledegook’ (Blunt and Jones, 1997, p. 913). It has been hard to know how to formulate a response to Blunt and Jones' scholarly rebuke of our paper on ‘The meaning of work in Malawi’ (Carr et al ., 1997), in which we present data that are neither ‘obvious’ nor ‘conventional’, nor ‘muddled’. The whole tone of Blunt and Jones' reply to our paper is not acceptable, or productive. In this brief reply, we will demonstrate how it obfuscates, and augments, the lack of substance in their own research. We also delineate their self‐contradiction, express concern over their claiming ownership and closure of what could be a vibrant field of study, and explain how they have completely missed the point of questioning the very concept of a Maslowian‐style hierarchy. Blunt and Jones' (1997) conclusion, part of which we have quoted above, appears to be an attempt to respond to our explanation for the lack of such a hierarchy, an explanation which we couched in terms of the importance of retaining cultural identity. Their lack of appreciation of how Western psychological models may be nullified by cultural and contextual diversity is both alarming and out‐of‐kilter with much contemporary thinking in development studies. Copyright © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.