Behaviorism at Work
A “The Eminents” interview with Manuel Rodriguez.
Posted July 3, 2017 | Reviewed by Devon Frye
Behaviorism is among psychology’s most robust principles. Per B.F. Skinner , the principle is that you get more of what you reward, less of what you ignore, and especially less of what you punish.
Behaviorism is widely used to address challenging behavior, for example, with children with developmental disabilities. In the workplace, it's often referred to as Organizational Behavior Management (OBM.)
Manuel “Manny” Rodriguez is the Executive Director of the Organizational Behavior Management Network and its former President of its Board. Here is my interview with him.
Marty Nemko: Behaviorism is sometimes criticized as encouraging unethical behavior. For example, most organizations offer rewards for increasing revenue and the threat of punishment (perhaps firing) if you don’t “make your number.” Doesn’t that encourage cutting ethical corners, for example, hiding a product’s weaknesses?
Manuel Rodriguez: Most tools can be used for good and for ill. A knife can be used to pare a fruit or to kill someone. Similarly, all psychological tools need to be used ethically to ensure an ethical result. It is ethical for an employer to identify behaviors that will create better products or services while being cognizant of employer and societal needs and then issuing appropriate-level rewards and punishments.
MN: Another critique of behaviorism, whether in the workplace, classroom, or clinical psychology, is that it ignores foundational causes of behavior, for example, the residue of childhood trauma , a drug abuse problem, etc.
MR: No tool is a cure-all. That’s why the field of OBM makes ever greater efforts at interdisciplinarity.
For example, two firms were merging. To ensure an effective and humane transition, the firms hired a clinical psychologist to help the leadership team identify the emotional issues that they, the employees, and other stakeholders will face. The firms also hired an industrial-organizational psychologist to ensure that the right employees were retained and hired, both in terms of workplace effectiveness and as positive influences on workplace culture. And the firms used an OBM consultant to ensure that appropriate incentives were in place to facilitate a smooth transition.
MN: A third concern about OBM is that some important factors are too difficult or too expensive to measure. For example, excellent managers, if only through modeling, improve their employees’ reasoning, decision-making , emotional intelligence , etc. But to try to measure all those factors regularly is costly and, in the case of non-cognitive factors, of limited validity. Does too much focus on the measurable ignore other important factors?
MR: Such factors will generally affect factors that are unarguably important to measure: profits, employee retention, customer satisfaction, etc.
MN: What’s an example of OBM having benefited not only an organization but the larger society?
MR: OBM has greatly improved worker safety at everything from mining sites to manufacturing plants.
MN: How might OBM be used to enhance safety?
MR: Management and workers might develop a checklist of safe behaviors in a workspace or job category and then, at random intervals, do spot checks, praising safe behaviors and, on seeing an unsafe behavior, treating it as a learning moment. Perhaps the employee has a good reason for the unsafe behavior in which management has the learning opportunity. Or the employee’s being asked about that provides both feedback and sufficient punishment for that employee to subsequently follow safety procedures.
MN: Is OBM also applicable to white-collar workers?
MR: Absolutely. For example, white-collar workers sit a lot and recent research finds that people are more productive and healthier if they get out of their chairs for a few minutes every hour. That’s concrete behavior perfectly suited to OBM. A person could use an app that chimes every hour and the person can note if s/he was out of the seat for five to ten percent of that hour.
And here’s a personal example: As a consultant, I do a lot of traveling. On trips, it’s tempting to eat poorly and exercise less. I use an app on my watch to keep track of my eating and exercise. It links to my social network so I'm additionally motivated—I don't want to look bad to my friends. I used to gain weight during business trips. Now I lose.
MN: Regarding sitting, I’d think that sit-stand desks would also help.
MN: What’s another relatively new use of OBM?
MR: Gamification. Organizations are using behavioral principles that make video games so motivating: for example, for achieving objectives, badges with titles ranging from "novice" to "ninja."
MN: Might anything surprise me about OBM?
MR: Some people think OBM is a soft science. It’s not. We focus on direct observation rather than assumption. We help people understand what they know, how they learn, what motivates them, and how they influence others In other words, we turn ambiguity into measurable behaviors to make a positive impact.
MN: Some kinds of rewards are obvious: pay, praise, plum assignments. Are there less obvious but potent rewards?
MR: Simply giving feedback on performance, like, “I like the way you X” as well as constructive criticism. Giving feedback rewards both receiver and giver. Receivers get areas for growth and givers feel good about contributing to growth and may get to see the fruits of their efforts.
MN: Some sorts of punishment are obvious: pay cuts, being excluded from important meetings, and getting fired. What's something potent but less obvious?
MR: Unintentional punishment: employees being ignored by the boss, the boss being ignored by employees, ideas being pushed down the priority list. Inadvertent punishment may demotivate, lead the person to do more reinforcing activities, or seek employment elsewhere. Examine your workplace through that lens and you’ll help ensure you’re not punishing desirable behaviors.
MN: Anything else you want to share with our readers?
MR: I want to reiterate that while OBM and, more broadly, rewards and punishments, can be inordinately beneficial to an organization, its employees, and society, we recognize that it is but one of psychology’s contributors to a better world.
You can find the other The Eminents interviews by googling the term “The Eminents” plus the interviewee’s name. They are child development experts T Berry Brazelton, David Elkind and Alison Gopnik, physicist Michio Kaku, ethicist Peter Singer, multiple intelligences founder Howard Gardner, self-help guru Tony Robbins, genetic enhancement expert George Church, biological basis of intelligence expert Richard Haier, attorneys Alan Dershowitz and Gerry Spence, political analyst Larry Sabato, bioethicist Mildred Solomon, substance abuse expert Nora Volkow, organization expert Julie Morgenstern, gifted/special-needs expert Edward Amend, body language expert Joe Navarro, IDEO design expert Tom Kelly, ADHD expert Stephen Hinshaw, evolutionary biologist Robert Sapolsky, philosophers Michael Scriven and Susan Haack, economists Robert Samuelson and Robert Shiller, essayist Philip Lopate, animal-assisted therapy expert Aubrey Fine, sports psychologist, John Murray, and psychology of driving expert Leon James. My next planned "The Eminents" interview is with Steven Pinker author of the forthcoming book, "Enlightenment Now."
Share this post Facebook Bluesky Linkedin Email
Marty Nemko, Ph.D ., is a career and personal coach based in Oakland, California, and the author of 10 books.
Get the help you need from a therapist near you–a FREE service from Psychology Today.
This article is part of the Bringwise Psychology Journal — daily insights on human behavior, mental health, and personal growth.