Chapter 10: Motivation and Coaching Skills
KnowledgeBank, p. 294
Behavior Modification and Motivational Skills
Behavior modification, a well-known system of motivation, is an attempt to change
behavior by manipulating rewards and punishment. Behavior modification stems directly
from reinforcement theory. Since many readers are already familiar with reinforcement
theory and behavior modification (often shortened to “behavior mod”), we will limit our
discussion to a brief summary of the basics of behavior modification, and focus instead
on its leadership applications.
An underlying principle of behavior modification is the law of effect: Behavior that
leads to a positive consequence for the individual tends to be repeated. In contrast,
behavior that leads to a negative consequence tends not to be repeated. Leaders typically
emphasize linking behavior with positive consequences, such as expressing enthusiasm
for a job well done.
Behavior Modification Strategies
The techniques of behavior modification apply to both learning and motivation; they can
be divided into four strategies. Positive reinforcement, which rewards the right response,
increases the probability that the behavior will be repeated. The phrase increases the
probability means that positive reinforcement improves learning and motivation but is not
100 percent effective. The phrase the right response is also noteworthy. When positive
reinforcement is used properly, a reward is contingent upon the person doing something
right. If the company achieves a high-quality award, the company president might
recognize the accomplishment by giving a bonus to all. Authorizing a bonus for no
particular reason might be pleasant, but it is not positive reinforcement.
Avoidance motivation (or negative reinforcement) is rewarding people by taking away
an uncomfortable consequence of their behavior. It is the withdrawal or avoidance of a
disliked consequence. A leader offers avoidance motivation when he or she says, “We
have performed so well that the wage freeze will now be lifted.” Removal of the
undesirable consequence of a wage freeze was contingent upon performance above
expectation. Be careful not to confuse negative reinforcement with punishment. Negative
reinforcement is the opposite of punishment: It involves rewarding someone by removing
a punishment or an uncomfortable situation.
Punishment is the presentation of an undesirable consequence, or the removal of a
desirable consequence, because of unacceptable behavior. A leader or manager can
punish a group member by demoting him or her for an ethical violation such as lying to a
customer. Or the group member can be punished by losing the opportunity to attend an
executive development program.
Extinction is decreasing the frequency of undesirable behavior by removing the
desirable consequence of such behavior. Company leaders might use extinction by
ceasing to pay employees for making frivolous cost-saving suggestions. Extinction is
sometimes used to eliminate annoying behavior. Assume that a group member persists in
telling ethnic jokes. The leader and the rest of the group can agree to ignore the jokes and
thus extinguish the joke telling.
A guiding principle for motivating workers through behavior modification is that you
get what you reinforce. If the leader or manager wants workers to perform in certain
ways, such as answering customer inquiries over the Internet within twenty-four hours,
that particular behavior must be reinforced. Reinforcing other behaviors, such as handling
many inquiries, will not lead to the performance improvement sought. In a behavior
modification program in a bank, supervisors gave feedback and recognition in front of
coworkers to tellers who performed certain customer service behaviors. These included
using the customer’s name, providing a statement balance, and making eye contact.
Customer satisfaction as measured by a survey increased after these customer service
behaviors were reinforced.[1]
Rules for the Use of Behavior Modification
Behavior modification in organizations, often called OB Mod, frequently takes the form
of a companywide program administered by the human resources department. Our focus
here is on leaders’ day-by-day application of behavior mod, with an emphasis on positive
reinforcement. The coaching role of a leader exemplifies the application of positive
reinforcement. Although using rewards and punishments to motivate people seems
straightforward, behavior modification requires a systematic approach. The rules
presented here are specified from the standpoint of a leader or manager trying to motivate
an individual or a group.[2]
Rule 1: Target the desired behavior. An effective program of behavior modification
begins with specifying the desired behavior—that which will be rewarded. The target or
critical behaviors chosen are those that have a significant impact on performance, such as
asking to take an order, conducting performance appraisals on time, or troubleshooting a
customer problem. According to Fred Luthans, the critical behaviors are the 5 to 10
percent of behaviors that may account for as much as 70 or 80 percent of the performance
in the area in question.[3]
Rule 2: Choose an appropriate reward or punishment. An appropriate reward or
punishment is one that is (1) effective in motivating a given group member or group and
(2) feasible from the company standpoint. If one reward does not work, try another.
Feasible rewards include money, recognition, challenging new assignments, and status
symbols such as a private work area. Stock options are widely used to motivate
executives, and sometimes workers at all levels. Companies such as Starbucks
Corporation, Cisco Systems, First Tennessee Bank, and General Mills offer stock options
for all employees. The expectation is that each recipient of a stock option will work hard
to improve company performance so that the stock price will rise and he or she will
benefit personally.
Most of the rewards mentioned so far are extrinsic. However, intrinsic rewards can also
be part of behavior modification. A person who performs well might be offered the
opportunity to engage in more work that is exciting or fun, such as being a company
representative at a trade show.
When positive motivators do not work, it may be necessary to use negative motivators
(punishment). It is generally best to use the mildest form of punishment that will motivate
the person or group. For example, if a group member reads a newspaper during the day,
the person might simply be told to put away the newspaper. Motivation enters the picture
because the time not spent on reading the newspaper can now be invested in company
work. If the mildest form of punishment does not work, a more severe negative motivator
is selected. Written documentation placed in the person’s personnel file is a more severe
punishment than a mere mention of the problem.
Rule 3: Supply ample feedback. Behavior modification cannot work without frequent
feedback to individuals and groups. Feedback can take the form of simply telling people
when they have done something right or wrong. Brief paper or electronic messages are
another form of feedback. Be aware, however, that many employees resent seeing a
message with negative feedback flashed across their video display terminals.
Rule 4: Do not give everyone the same-sized reward. Average performance is
encouraged when all forms of accomplishment receive the same reward. Say one group
member makes substantial progress in providing input for a strategic plan. He or she
should receive more recognition (or other reward) than a group member who makes only
a minor contribution to solving the problem.
Rule 5: Find some constructive behavior to reinforce. This rule stems from behavior
shaping, rewarding any response in the right direction and then rewarding only the
closest approximation. Using this approach, the desired behavior is finally attained.
Behavior shaping is useful to the manager because the technique recognizes that you
have to begin somewhere in teaching a worker a new skill or motivating a worker to
make a big change. For example, if you were attempting to motivate a group member to
make exciting computer graphics (such as PowerPoint), you would congratulate the first
step forward from preparing a mundane overhead transparency. You would then become
more selective about what type of presentation received a reward.
Rule 6: Schedule rewards intermittently. Rewards for good performance should not be
given on every occasion. Intermittent rewards sustain desired behavior longer, and also
slow the process of behavior fading away when it is not rewarded. If a person is rewarded
for every instance of good performance, he or she is likely to keep up the level of
performance until the reward comes, then slack off. Another problem is that a reward that
is given continuously may lose its impact. A practical value of intermittent reinforcement
is that it saves time. Few leaders have enough time to dispense rewards for every good
deed forthcoming from team members.
Rule 7: Ensure that rewards and punishments follow the behavior closely in time. For
maximum effectiveness, people should be rewarded shortly after doing something right,
and punished shortly after doing something wrong. A built-in feedback system, such as a
computer program working or not working, capitalizes on this principle. Many effective
leaders get in touch with people quickly to congratulate them on an outstanding
accomplishment.
Rule 8: Change the reward periodically. Rewards do not retain their effectiveness
indefinitely. Team members lose interest in striving for a reward they have received many
times in the past. This is particularly true of a repetitive statement such as “Nice job” or
“Congratulations.” Plaques for outstanding performance also lose their motivational
appeal after a group receives many of them. It is helpful for the leader or manager to
formulate a list of feasible rewards and try different ones from time to time.
Rule 9: Make the rewards visible and the punishments known. Another important
characteristic of an effective reward is the extent to which it is visible, or noticeable to
other employees. When other workers notice the reward, its impact multiplies because
other people observe what kind of behavior is rewarded.[4] Assume that you are told
about a coworker having received an exciting assignment because of high performance.
You might strive to accomplish the same level of performance. Most people are aware
that public punishments are poor human relations. Yet when coworkers become aware of
what behaviors are punished, they receive an important message. A good example took
place in a security systems office when a new member of the team distributed a series of
sexually offensive jokes by email to coworkers. The man was immediately put on
probation, and coworkers received a message about what constitutes unacceptable
behavior.
Research indicates that behavior modification leads to important outcomes such as
productivity improvement. For example, an experiment was conducted in the operations
division of a company that processes and mails credit card bills for several hundred
financial institutions, ecommerce customers included. The four groups in the study were
those receiving (1) routine pay for performance, (2) monetary incentives based on
behavior mod, (3) social recognition, such as public compliments, and (4) performance
feedback. Monetary rewards based on the principles of behavior modification
outperformed routine pay for performance, with a performance increase of 37 percent
versus 11 percent. Monetary incentives also had stronger effects on performance than
social recognition and performance feedback.[5] Evidence like this is reassuring to the
leader or manager who intends to apply behavior modification in the workplace.
[1]
Fred Luthans and Alexander D. Stajkovic, “Reinforce for Performance: The Need to Go Beyond Pay and Even
Rewards,” Academy of Management Executive, May 1999, pp. 49, 56.
[2]
An update on some of the behavior modification rules is presented in Luthans and Stajkovic, “Reinforce for
Performance,” pp. 49-57.
[3]
Fred Luthans, Organizational Behavior, 6th ed. (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1992), p. 237.
[4]
Steven Kerr, Ultimate Rewards: What Really Motivates People to Achieve, (Boston: Harvard Business School
Publishing, 1997).
[5]
Alexander D. Stajkovic and Fred Luthans, “Differential Effects of Incentive Motivators on Work
Performance,” The Academy of Management Journal, June 2001, pp. 580-590.