‘Behavior 101’ Articles

« Older Entries

Has the Daily Deal Lost Touch?

April 25th, 2012

1 Comment »

Guest Post by Bart Sevin, Ph.D.

It would go against logic to think that companies wouldn’t consider the customer first, especially today. Yet, I was surprised to read in a recent Fast Company article, Do Groupon and LivingSocial Do More Harm than Good? that despite taking in close to $3 billion in 2011, these daily deal providers seem to be declining after their meteoric rise.

While the concept seems simple, spend $20 to receive $40 to use in Restaurant A for example, why is it that there has been such significant decline?  One of the reasons many deal providers are losing money is the attrition of merchants who advertise via deal providers. The idea is that businesses can expand their customer bases quickly by reaching the masses via daily deal websites and email distribution lists with discounts that get new customers in the door, even though merchants typically lose money on the initial deal offering. Merchants of course accept the initial loss with the hope that once customers come into contact with their products and services, they will become repeat customers who continue to frequent their businesses, paying full retail prices after the deal is used. In most cases, that isn’t happening.

When new customers fail to turn into repeat customers, where does the accountability lie, with the deal providers or the merchants? Since it rarely helps to assign blame and point fingers, maybe it’s more helpful to ask, what can be done differently to increase the probability that customers will return for the same or new products and services after their initial experience?

Behavioral science offers a useful conceptual framework for understanding why this problem is occurring and what to do about it. Using the ABC model, in which the B stands for behavior, it tells us that there are two things that influence behavior, namely antecedents and consequences represented by the A and the C in the model. We know antecedents come before and prompt or trigger behavior, and that consequences, both positive and negative, follow behavior and determine whether it is strengthened or weakened over time (i.e., whether it’s repeated or it stops). So when customers purchase deal coupons, the deals themselves are antecedents for customers that prompt them to go try a merchant’s products or services maybe for the first time, and the deals do this well by reducing the costs associated with patronage. The experience the customer has when they interface with merchants is the consequence that determines whether customers will repeat the behavior of buying goods and services again or whether they leave and never return. The customer experience provided by the merchants, then, is where the rubber meets the road.

In the examples provided in the article of merchants who have and have not had success with deal providers, the ones who provided the best customer experiences got the most repeat business, and in turn returned to offer more deals through the providers. The ones who provided poor (i.e., negative) customer experiences generated little to no repeat business and in turn blamed the deal providers, and didn’t advertise with them again.  It is more than likely that the problem some merchants have in getting repeat business from customers is not exclusive to customers buying daily deals. But, if the customer experience is substandard, repeat business isn’t likely to be obtained regardless of how the customers were initially connected to the merchants.

With that said, what can merchants and providers do differently to develop a better return on their investments? Merchants can begin by asking some important questions such as, What do I want (new) customers to do and say when they walk in the door with (or without) deal coupons? One objective might be to get customers to ask questions about other goods and services and state what their current needs are. If so, merchants can ask, What can we do and say to prompt and reinforce these types of behaviors from customers?

If deal providers want repeat business from merchants, they should ask questions like, What do we want merchants to do and say when they advertise a deal with us? Objectives might be for merchants to first state a goal of how many deals they want sold and then acknowledge meeting or exceeding the goals. Providers might also state goals that report back on the amount of repeat business generated through daily deal advertising. Providers can then further ask, What can we say and do to help increase the likelihood of merchants’ success in these areas? Providers might consider offering recommendations and then following up with merchants.

In my research for this post, I spoke with a representative from RapidBuyr, a B2B daily deal provider specializing in providing companies with access to higher dollar services and products. He offered data-based guidance on the types of deals merchants are likely to sell. He also asked about the types of products and services we offered, and what kind of experience potential customers were likely to have if they purchased a deal. RapidBuyr representatives make a practice of circling back with merchants to follow up on the outcomes from advertising deals. In my opinion this deal provider is doing it well.

Asking these types of questions and offering guidance on strategies likely to help merchants reach their objectives are the types of provider behaviors that are likely to help merchants generate repeat business from advertising daily deals, which in turn will help providers get repeat business from merchants. Whether deal provider companies last over the long term remains to be seen, but it seems that a shift from providers simply advertising any and all merchant deals, to providers partnering together with merchants on strategies and providing ongoing support to identify what worked and what can be improved will be critical to the long-term success of the daily deal industry.

Behavior 101, feedback, Motivation, Negative Reinforcement, Positive Reinforcement, Results

Science Made Simple

April 23rd, 2012

No Comments »

Watch this! It is a fun video but she is dead on. She presents scientific facts about reinforcement in a clever and very understandable way.  It is worth the time.

Behavior 101, Consequences, Motivation, Negative Reinforcement, Positive Reinforcement

Helping and when it doesn’t

March 5th, 2012

No Comments »

moneyThere is much being said by politicians these days about helping the poor.  The problem is that everything done by Congress for the past 40 years has not helped.  Earned Income Tax Credit, Food Stamps, Aid to Families with Dependent Children and other programs by church, charity and the government have done little to help people escape from poverty.  Poverty levels, as defined by the U.S. Government, have remained between 14 and 15% since 1970. After the trillions of tax dollars that have been spent over that time period taxpayers and the poor deserve better.  If the goal of this expenditure is to lift people out of poverty, it doesn’t.  Something is terribly wrong.

We have the same problem with foreign aid.  How many friends have we made with the hundreds of billions of dollars spent in the last decade — Afghanistan?  Iraq? Pakistan? Egypt?   The desire to help the poor in the U.S. and in the developing countries of the world is commendable.  The intent is correct; the impact is minimal.

This week when the U.S. Government was considering withholding aid to Egypt in the light of the Americans, who were imprisoned there, I couldn’t help but think of the movie from the 50’s starring Peter Sellers titled, The Mouse that roared.  The plot involved the leaders of The Duchy of Grand Fenwick who decided that the only way the country could get out of its economic woes was to declare war on the United States, lose and accept the traditional foreign aid.

The problem in both these situations is that the contingencies of reinforcement are wrong.  People in charge of dispensing billions of dollars seem unaware of what behaviors they are reinforcing when they give out the money.  The way it appears to be done is akin to a situation that is mishandled by many parents every day.  They say to a crying or whining child, “If you will stop crying, I will get it for you.”  While on the face of it, it seems right.  The problem is that the next time they want something they will cry because in order to stop crying, you must first start crying.  The behavior chain that is strengthened by this tactic is: start crying; stop crying; get something you want.

Reinforcement strengthens the behavior required to get it.  Some people are helped when you give them money. Academic scholarships are typically effective because the classes of behaviors that are usually rewarded are industriousness and academic achievement.  The hard-working poor often need help, and the help, money or otherwise, is usually productive.  By productive I mean that the person uses the money or other resources wisely and is more independent as a result.  However, giving street beggars money increases begging.  It almost never does anything to help the person become independent.  Actually it does the opposite.  It makes them dependent on the largess of the passersby.

Since money is such a powerful motivator it must be used carefully.  It can be used to create good or evil, productivity or idleness, efficiency or wastefulness, competition or cooperation.  Whether the former or the latter, it is determined by the contingency of reinforcement, that is, what one actually has to do to get the reinforcement.  If all candidates for public office have to do to get people to vote for them is to make a promise, then what s/he will be good at in office is making promises, not necessarily good at delivering what was promised.  If you give people who are not industrious money for promising they will spend it wisely, don’t be surprised when they waste the money and come back with a promise not to do it next time.  If a beggar wins the lottery, it is unlikely that he will be prosperous years later.  As Tug McGraw, famous, or infamous, pitcher of the New York Mets once said about how he would spend his plush salary, “Ninety percent I’ll spend on good times, women and Irish whiskey.  The other ten percent I’ll probably waste.”

I have often said that if you give someone something for nothing, you will make him/her “good for nothing.”  There is a body of research that shows that non-contingent reinforcement decreases motivation and may degrade performance.  Whether at home, in the workplace or even in social relationships, consider the behavior that is being reinforced.   For example, a chore-based allowance is better for children than a weekly allowance since completing chores is required to get the reinforcement.  The weekly allowance becomes an entitlement since being a member of the family is the reinforcement contingency that entitles the child to the money.  Even though the chore-based allowance produces competence and confidence, the weekly one is more preferred by parents because it is easier for them to administer than a chore-based one, where follow-up is necessary.  Think earn.

The science of behavior has demonstrated how to use money to help people be more independent and self-reliable at home, at work, in the community and how to create friends of America abroad.  The secret is in knowing the science of behavior.

Behavior 101, Consequences, Incentives, Motivation, Performance, Performance Pay, Positive Reinforcement

Why Wall Street won’t ever change their spending ways

January 13th, 2012

No Comments »

business man with piggy bank on head and hands onI’m going to get right to the point.  I have little faith that Wall Street will ever get smarter about how they spend their money. The reality is they have too much of other people’s money and deal in such large amounts day to day that they will never take seriously the efficiency and effectiveness of their own management systems.  They have seen good times and bad.  While they are talking about making dramatic changes now, history has proven that they will only be temporary.  Even though they are in a position now where their financial belts will have to be tightened, it will be only for a short time because when the economy improves they will return to their spendthrift ways.  Why?  Because they don’t know any better and since they are in the business of selling money have come to believe that money will solve their problems only if it is given in large amounts.  It is an environment where $100,000 is considered “chump change.”

What prompted this blog was an article in Bloomberg News titled, “Wall Street Mulls Partial Pay Freeze” by Jeffery McCracken and Christine Harper.  They talk about the fact that revenues in the investment-banking business have been so bad that they might have to resort to eliminating the practice of boosting pay automatically each year.  They quote Joseph Sorrentino of Steven Hall & Partners, an executive-compensation consultancy who said, “Pay increases have been traditionally automatic because there are traditionally very long hours in terms of the amount of work and this is another way to try to boost their morale and signify that they’re a strong part of the firm and that they’re appreciated.”  This quote cracks me up because it shows the almost total lack of understanding of the laws of behavior.

I can assure you that Mr. Sorrentino has no data showing that the way these investment banking firms structure bonuses improves junior bankers’ performance, retention or morale.  It is naïve to think that you can treat people poorly day to day, give them money at the end of the year and think that will create the feeling that “they’re a strong part of the firm and that they’re appreciated.”

The reason these firms can get away with wasting millions of compensation dollars is because practically every company in the industry is using the same poor uninformed compensation practices.  Therefore, no firm has an advantage or disadvantage.  The customer pays the freight.

If these firms ever get to a point where they must operate in a more sound way financially, I can suggest several things.

  1. Every problem cannot be solved with money, even on Wall Street.  What causes people to quit and go to another company is more about the way they are managed than the money they make.  If employees are treated poorly, they will leave for a dollar more.  If they are treated well, it will take a lot more to hire them away.  Make no mistake, loyalty cannot be bought.  Big bonuses have often helped a disaffected employee start a competitive company or retire early.


  2. Bonuses that are not earned, more often than not, do not strengthen productive behavior because that is not the contingency involved in receiving the bonus.  While upper management believes that annual bonuses increase loyalty and performance, they do neither because they don’t have to be loyal or productive to receive one.  They have to do just enough to stay on the payroll.  Of course management doesn’t believe this because if they did, they would make immediate changes where nothing would be automatic that was not individually earned.  A system where employees knew the personal accomplishments they had to achieve to earn the money would be far superior and less costly.


  3. Forget what rival firms do.  Focus on promoting to management only those who have good social skills and an understanding of the science of behavior.  Pinpoint the behaviors and results that are valuable and generously reinforce those behaviors and reward those who produce the results.  That way, the only thing that executives will have to “mull over” will be how to spend the money that is left over.

Ask Aubrey, Behavior 101, Consequences, Culture "Change", Incentives, Leadership, Performance Pay, Positive Reinforcement, Results, Rewards

New Year’s Resolutions: Beware!

January 3rd, 2012

2 Comments »

MH900438914The origin of New Year’s Resolutions can be linked to pre-Christian times in Rome, thousands of years ago.  So every year about this time, I ask audiences where I speak how many made New Year’s Resolutions.  What I have noticed is that fewer and fewer have gone through the ritual.  Does that mean that fewer people are interested in carrying on this ancient tradition?  I think not.  In fact, it’s been reported that more than half of those that proclaim resolutions fail at realizing them. The reality is that most people who make resolutions don’t keep them – many don’t keep them even for a day.

The primary mistake people make in making resolutions is that they think that changing some personal behavior or habit is simply a matter of will power or “making up your mind.”  It is as if people who fail don’t grunt enough, don’t have enough resolve (how do you get more of that?), are not really serious (How can you increase your “really seriousness?).

The real mistake lies in not planning or managing consequences well.  It is easy to resolve to quit drinking, lose weight, start exercising, etc. but it is harder to plan consequences that you will actually be able to self-administer to get the behavior change you seek.  Therefore, the resolution is nothing more than a goal, and goals aren’t reached by grunting, wishing or talking; they are reached when you have consequences that support the behavior change.

Here are some practical suggestions to help you be successful should you want to carry on the New Year’s Resolution tradition.

  1. Plan consequences for behavior change. Allow yourself to do things that you like contingent on a certain accomplishment. In other words, if you resolve to do some project in your house, commit to getting it done before you sit down to watch your favorite TV program.
  2. Set very small sub-goals. The more, the better.  If weight loss is a target, set a goal of no more than one pound a week.  The trick is to set a goal that you are almost sure to reach.  Less than a pound is ok if you can reliably measure it on your scales.  Smoke one cigarette less per day; walk around the block.  No goal can be too small at the beginning.
  3. Post a graph of your progress at home or in the office where everyone can see it.  Set the parameters so that progress is easy to see.  Tell family and co-workers what you are doing.  Use social media to show results.  Put the graph on Facebook, Twitter, etc. The more people who see your progress will reinforce you for it and in return you will be more motivated to keep at it.
  4. Celebrate every success (every goal accomplishment), no matter how small.  Reward yourself.  Publicize your small accomplishments.  “I am one step closer to finishing that big report.”
  5. In addition to rewards that cost money (buying something for yourself, dinner at a fancy restaurant, a movie, some new software for your computer, an iPad, etc.) think of rewards that have a low cost or have no financial cost.  Use the “IF I do X, then I will do Y” contingency.  Or, “when I do X, then I will do Y.”  If your resolution is to clean the attic, basement or garage, simply say, “When I put something in the trash, I will watch T.V, answer my email, play a computer game or go to McDonalds for breakfast.”  You will be surprised how quickly you finish the task with this simple start as long as you maintain the contingency “When…then.”

By the way don’t do it in reverse which most people are tempted to do, that is, “I will work in the attic after I come home from McDonalds.”  I call that bribery since it reinforces the wrong behavior.  You get the reward for promising to do the behavior, not for actually doing it.  Not a good plan.

Most failures to reach personal or work goals result from poor goal setting and from failure to plan positive reinforcers for success.  If you start the New Year with small goals and a multitude of reinforcement, 2012 may be your best year yet!

Behavior 101, Consequences, feedback, Goals, Motivation, Negative Reinforcement, Performance, Positive Reinforcement, Results

There they go again: National ban on texting while driving

December 27th, 2011

No Comments »

textingThere is no question that if no one used cell phones while driving, lives would be saved but so would not eating while driving or drinking a Coke or looking at GPS or talking to a passenger or solving disputes between children in the back seat or daydreaming or…(fill in the blank). It is a fact of life that distractions on the road are increasing and all of them increase the likelihood of an accident.

I believe that everyone who drives should keep his/her eyes on the road at all times and not attend to anything in or out of the car that would distract him or her. However, it ain’t going to happen. (Even in space the astronauts looked out the window.)

Cell phones are addictive in that they provide the user with a rate of reinforcement that is higher than almost anything else in the car. Therefore they are clearly the most dangerous. If we have just eaten we will not be likely to eat or drink in the car but if we have just talked to a friend while at the restaurant, it does not reduce the probability that we will not talk on the cell phone when we get back in the car. It may even increase it because we may remember something to tell the friend that we forgot when talking in the restaurant.

Employees at ADI responded to the NTSB’s recent national plea to ban cell phone use by making a pledge to stop using the phone while driving. It is a worthy goal. Only a week later, and none has been able to stop. They all said they are doing better but no one has stopped. Is it possible to develop a habit of driving without using a cell phone? It is, but it will take time, probably many weeks, even though they are not doing it under threat of getting a ticket or losing their license. It is a volunteer activity.

Why is it that the Department of Transportation only thinks of punishing those who do something wrong or dangerous as a way to stop the behavior? The first reason is that they want to give the public the impression that they are awake at the switch. The press release about “banning all cell phones” gives the appearance of taking the problem serious. Second, the statement by the chairman, Deborah Hersman that “We’re not here to win a popularity contest” makes it sound even more serious. Tough talk is often rewarded by the press and the public. Such speeches are make-work, “full of sound and fury signifying nothing.” In spite of appearing to be the right thing, they are the wrong thing to do for at least three reasons:

First, fining or even taking a license is a negative but uncertain consequence. No one using a cell phone thinks that s/he will get caught. When an uncertain negative consequence comes face to face with the positive immediate consequence of talking to someone about a problem, a girlfriend or boyfriend, an appointment, a dinner date, etc., the positive immediate consequence will win every time.

Second, the behavior of avoiding getting caught makes the use of the cell phone even more dangerous.

Third, how many times does the Department of Transportation have to come out with knee-jerk reactions and solutions with little evidence that they understand anything about human behavior until the public completely ignores their “warnings?” Think about compliance to speed limit signs.

I am bothered by drivers on the phone like everyone else. If a car is moving slowly in traffic or moving erratically, it angers me to see on passing that they are on the cellphone. However, I don’t want a legal or governmental solution since I know it won’t work. I also know that if a legal solution is advanced, it will never be repealed even though it doesn’t work.

I believe, as I have said before, that because of the positive immediate consequences provided by cell phone use, the only solution is a technological one. Make cell phones so that they will not work as long as the phone is moving. The sooner we come to that realization and put resources and time on that solution and less on pronouncements that won’t work, the sooner we will begin saving lives.

Behavior 101, Consequences, Negative Reinforcement, Technology

Why Some Managers Fail at Getting Effective and Efficient Performance

December 7th, 2011

1 Comment »

 MH900399109To succeed in business today, everything must constantly be scrutinized. As such, leaders and managers are forced to evaluate and reevaluate performance; specifically the performance of their people and its impact on the company’s bottom line. For some, their role is rewarding and the path forward is clear. For others, they are left wondering how to get direct reports to deliver the performance needed to achieve necessary business outcomes.

Effective performance is not something that only lucky managers can achieve from their employees. It’s also not something you’re born with. For those who find themselves challenged to get desired performance from direct reports, it’s likely they have fallen victim to some common traps. Here are two traps that failing managers can fall into:  

Using ineffective management practices: In management, just because something doesn’t work doesn’t mean managers won’t continue to use it. So many practices have been institutionalized through the years that it’s no wonder managers think nothing of adopting them. Ranking is one such practice whose intention is to drive motivation to be the best but in reality it devalues the performance of all those who aren’t at the top. What managers don’t understand is that, among other things, it creates internal competition and doesn’t motivate the ones on the bottom to improve or those at the top to reach higher. Unfortunately, it often creates enmity between those ranked higher and those rated lower. The reality is that if you aren’t at the top, or close to it, this process becomes demotivating as they realize they will never be able to perform better than those above them. 

Another common, and unintentional practice, is when managers use the ‘you did a good job but’ approach when providing feedback or attempting to correct poor performance. When managers provide reinforcement for the things employees did right but then end it on a note of what more they can improve, employees forget the good and focus only on what they did wrong. If this is done often, employees hate to hear the good because they know some criticism is likely to follow. They also begin to suspect that the only reason you say something good is to set them up for bad news.

A frequent mistake in correcting behavior is to “sandwich” the problem behavior between two compliments. Managers are often taught that saying something positive before mentioning the problem makes the employee more responsive to the negative and by ending with a positive it protects the person’s ego. What it does, in fact, is to dilute the message at best and provide positive reinforcement for the problem behavior at worst. Break this bad management practice. It may make you feel better about the correcting but has a very unreliable impact on the performer.

These methods even if done with the best of intentions are demotivating and usually result in employees doing only what they are required to do.

Unintentionally rewarding negative behavior: When managers don’t understand positive reinforcement as a scientific concept many problems usually occur in an effort to build a positive culture. For example, the worst advice you could ever give or get is: Always be positive! While it sounds good and many people strive to eliminate negativism from their relationships, we know that if you are positive at the wrong time, you will get more of the wrong behavior. Behavior that you want more of needs positive reinforcement; Behavior that you don’t want, does not.

A question to ask that will help you avoid rewarding negative behavior is, “What does the person want?” If bad behavior gets him what he wants, you can count on the fact that he will do it more often. For example, I have heard people say that “All he wants to do is argue.” If that is true, then arguing with him will only increase argumentative behavior. Positive reinforcement is a powerful interpersonal tool. Use it well and it will result in healthy, productive relationships. Use it poorly and it will make you and those you work with miserable, unhappy and unproductive. 

To create a productive and happy work group, you must:

  1. Know the reinforcers of those who work with you – everyone is different
  2. Establish yourself as a positive reinforcer – pair yourself with the delivery of meaningful reinforcers
  3. Reinforce incremental improvement – the smaller, the better
  4. Don’t stop – continue as long as you want performance

Behavior 101, Consequences, feedback, Negative Reinforcement, Positive Reinforcement

The Key to Understanding At Risk Behavior

November 28th, 2011

No Comments »

Drs. Judy Agnew and Aubrey Daniels tackle the issue of reporting and acting on unsafe behavior in this latest video blog.  Watch as they discuss why management must not only listen but act, publicly, to remediate unsafe working conditions.  In the end, organizations will benefit from improved trust between employees and leadership.


Behavior 101, Behavior Based Safety, Videos

Performance Management Isn’t What You Think

November 25th, 2011

No Comments »

R+ logo croppedYou may not want to miss my latest Talent Management Blog where I challenge readers on their definition of Performance Management and recommend that we rename Performance Appraisals to something that more clearly encompasses its original intent. Click over to find out what I think it ought to be called.

Also, don’t miss this month’s special report on Performance Management where you can read more from me and other leaders in the strategic HR arena.

Behavior 101, feedback, Goals, Leadership, Motivation, Negative Reinforcement, Performance Appraisal

Good Intentions, Bad Effects

November 8th, 2011

No Comments »

ethicsGuest post by Darnell Lattal

Throughout the past several years, ethics has made its way into business headlines, more often than not for bad rather than good. What people may be surprised to know though is that to get an organization to behave in ethical ways, it takes more than good people seeking to do good. It takes more than rules of conduct.  Ethical behavior is what is shaped day in and day out by unintended consequences that occur as work is done. To “be ethical” requires a very deliberate focus on the impact, not the intention, of actions. It is also a clear-eyed review of how behavior got going to begin with and the unethical effects on the organization.  It requires looking ahead at impact, not what has happened but what could happen and evaluating the degree of harm or good such impact could have.

There are things that each of us can do to contribute to a stronger ethical workplace. The best way to protect you and your organization is to understand how consequences increase or decrease the likely occurrence of certain kinds of behavior now and in the future. Here are a few suggestions:

  1. Talk openly. Make ethics a part of your workplace culture by talking openly and often about it.  When you provide examples and take the time to communicate its importance, individuals will have a stronger understanding of how to avoid slippery slopes.
  2. Build ethics into hiring and training. Include ethics as part of your selection interview. Examine a person’s responses to ethical dilemmas and identify specific actions to take. Ask about times when they did something wrong and how they decided what to do. Look at a candidate’s ability to balance among conflicting values and how the individual might apply his/her judgment to “messy customer situations” or with coworkers. In training, have your employees define terms such as treating others with respect and how they demonstrate that in their behavior. Present case studies that require discriminations among choices and discuss the implications. Have individuals bring real-life ethical dilemmas to the team for discussion and resolution.
  3. Focus on consequences. Attach consequences to desired behavior and measure its occurrence. Extreme behaviors lead to immediate termination, but most actions are not stuff of moral outrage. Remember that ethical discrimination is shaped, reinforced, maintained and changed by the contingencies that surround and support individual actions. Make your expectations clear and then follow up.
  4. Define criteria. Establish a set of criteria to evaluate your own actions and share those with others.
  5. Support others. Encourage, model and help others establish a method to discuss actions and increase alertness to the ethical issues in everyday decisions.
  6. Monitor and enforce ethical behavior. Assure that structure and resources exist to monitor and enforce commitment to an ethical climate. Regular coaching and feedback, training sessions to increase skills, customer and employee feedback, structures, systems and processes that allow for the orderly flow of work are all important in reinforcing ethical behavior.

Be alert to what the longer term effects of consequences are for individuals and for the culture of an organization. The ethical traps, unintended consequences, are easy to fall into and none of us are immune from the fall.

Read more…

Behavior 101, Consequences, Culture "Change", Leadership, Positive Reinforcement

« Older Entries