During my basic courses in business school Maslow's hierarchy of needs was cited quite often, while in higher courses of personal and organizational management it got shunned by my lecturers. In inter-cultural communications Hofstede's criticism was highlighted and lack of empiric evidence since the 70s mentioned. That made me think about how it became general knowledge and why many of my older relatives are aware of the concept and acknowledge it as truthful.
That leads me to my questions, how and why did Maslow's hierarchy earned its influence; what did its growth look like; why was it (seemingly) used so often in business management and politics?
What influences had its anthropogenetic view on society or political practice? Most interesting would be to see places in which it was really used as tool or foundation of action.
There are really two answers to your question.
The short answer. Maslow's hierarchy of needs is just not terribly useful in teaching (or in the actual practice of) management.
The only reason I ever bring it up in class is as a stimulus for discussion. For example, when do we decide that those lower-level needs have been met? Somebody such as, say, Nelson Mandela, seems to have overlooked lower level needs such as safety for (arguably) self-actualization. A second example -- how does money factor into this (and we care because organizations have to determine how to use limited resources most effectively)? Money can be used to satisfy any of Maslow's needs, arguably. Obviously the lower-level survival needs, but money can satisfy the need for love and belonging (or at least get you a date on Saturday night). We know about money and esteem....and you can even make the argument that money/resources can make it possible for an individual to have the time for self-actualization. Those are just two examples; it's easy to spend 50 minutes demolishing Maslow as a useful tool for managers.
The second answer to your question has to do with the state of research (both in psychology and in management) on motivation and how it works in the work setting. Up through the 1960's, we thought of motivation in terms of needs -- that is, what needs motivated people. By the late 1960's and beyond, the research focus shifted away from needs and to process. That is, how does the motivation process work, and what can be done in terms of job design, reward systems, etc. to more effectively motivate employees.
I hope this addresses your question. I can come back Thursday and expand on any of this and add sources if you or anyone else is interested.
PS -- Where did you get the idea that Hofstede is "shunned"? There has been boatloads of cross-cultural management research, from the 1970s to today, using the Hofstede framework. There are methodological problems and other issues, but we have not, by any stretch of the imagination, thrown Hofstede out the window.