The purpose of this discussion was to review Kaufman\'s perspective on Training Needs Assessment(TNA) by Rossette. Although TNA has proven it\'s practical usefulness for assessing training needs, Kaufman tries to go beyond what is currently believed as needs assessors\' role based on his organizational element model(OEM). The achronym, OEMNA is made up by the author to represent Organization Element Model Needs Assessmet which means Kauman\'s needs assessment approach through his ideas suggested in OEM. The discussion starts with reviewing types of needs identified by Sleezer(1992). Needs are defined as discrepancies in performanc in both TNA and OEMNA. However, it is argued that needs in TNA mean gaps in performance process (i.e., process and input) while needs in OEMNA mean gaps in performance results(i.e., outcomes, outputs, and product). Kaufman puts the highest priority on needs identified at the outcome level of result. This is because he wants to contribute to the actualization of the shared ideal vision of society. Therefore, he expects that needs assessors ask \'Why?\' during their needs assessment activities. He makes a clear point that needs assessment done without asking \'Why\' may even be detrimental to society. This is because he recognizes that needs assessor in TNA tradition tend to work only for the clients from funding organization. According to him, TNA drives needs assessors to be means-oriented not ends(results)-oriented, and reactive not proactive. Therefore, he contends that with OEMNA, needs assessors will be able to role-down from the ideal vision of the society, contributing to ideal society for future children.