FORMULATIONS REGARDING OPERANT BEHAVIOR SET FORTH BY HAMNER

The basic concept of the theory is learning, defined as “a relatively permanent change in behavior potentiality that results from reinforced practice or experience” (Hamner1974a, 87). Performance is the translation of what is learned into practice. Through reinforcement certain behaviors are strengthened and intensified and thus occur more frequently.

Behavior may occur in a reflex manner in response to changes in the environment. This type of behavior is of little concern for the theory. What is important is operant behavior, behavior emit-ted by a person that influences or has an effect upon the individual’s outside world. Operant behaviors are learned as consequences accrue in the form of rewards and punishments that are applied contingent upon whether certain behaviors do or do not occur. Thus, the role of the supervisor becomes one of orchestrating reinforcements to produce desired behaviors at a high frequency; this is how performance can be improved.

Operant learning involves a process whereby reinforcers are applied to initially randomly emitted behaviors. Accordingly, to understand a person’s behavior one must know the situa-tion in which the behavior occurs, the nature of the behavior, and the reinforcing conse-quences. To influence a person’s behavior in a desired direction, one must know how to arrange correctly the contingencies of reinforcement. The major hypotheses of the theory relate to the relative effectiveness of manipulating the contingencies of reinforcement in different ways.

Types of Contingencies

Four different types of arrangements of contingencies are specified. Two serve to strengthen de-sired behavior (positive reinforcement and avoidance learning) and two serve to weaken undes-ired behavior (extinction and punishment). “A positive reinforcer is a stimulus which, when added to a situation, strengthens the probability of an operant response” (Skinner 1953, 73). Certain reinforcers such as food, water, and sex are innate and thus operate independent of past experi-ences. In the work context, however, the important reinforcers are learned, such as advancement, praise, recognition, and money. What is a reinforcer for one person may not be for another; it depends on the individual’s past reinforcement history.

OPERANT BEHAVIOR AND ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR MODIFICATION 117 Hamner (1974a) describes three steps in the successful application of reinforcement theory in the work environment:

1. Select reinforcers that are powerful and durable for the individual.

2. Design contingencies so as to make the occurrence of reinforcing events contingent upon desired behavior.

3. Design contingencies so that a reliable procedure for eliciting the desired behavior is established.

The third point is important because if one cannot ever find the desired behavior to reward, learning cannot occur. Training thus becomes a method of shaping behavior so that it can be controlled by reinforcement procedures. Separate aspects and approximations of the total desired behavior are reinforced until finally the behavior as a whole is shaped; learning to drive a car might be an example.

Avoidance learning operates in a manner similar to positive reinforcement except that the desired behavior serves to prevent the onset of a noxious stimulus, or, in a variant, terminates such a stimulus that already exists. In the workplace, supervisory criticism is often such a noxious stimulus. Although avoidance learning is effective under certain circumstances, many behavior modification advocates, including Skinner, much prefer positive reinforcement.

Extinction occurs when a previously utilized positive reinforcer is withheld. Under such cir-cumstances the behavior involved may continue for some time, but as the reward continually fails to appear, the behavior diminishes and ultimately is extinguished entirely. This approach is ap-propriate when an individual brings undesired behaviors to the job or when an undesired behav-ior has inadvertently been reinforced in the past.

Many behavior modification advocates prefer extinction to punishment as a method of influ-encing behavior, on the grounds that punishment may have certain negative side effects. Skinner himself does not favor the use of punishment. There are, however, many behavior modification approaches in use that draw heavily on the reinforcement effects of punishment. There is no unanimity on this matter.

Hamner (1974a) and Hamner and Hamner (1976) present several rules for using operant con-ditioning techniques, which might best be considered as hypotheses with regard to how desired behaviors may be obtained.

1. Do not give the same level of reward to all; differentiate based on some performance standard.

2. Failure to respond to behavior has reinforcing consequences; these consequences should be recognized, and nonaction as well as action should be adjusted to the desired ends.

3. Tell a person what behavior gets reinforced.

4. Tell a person what he or she is doing wrong.

5. Do not punish in front of others; there may be undesirable side effects not only for the person punished but for the others as well.

6. Make the consequences equal to the behavior.

Schedules of Reinforcement

Although a variety of different reinforcement schedules are possible, certain ones are of particular theoretical and practical relevance. Continuous reinforcement occurs when every instance of the

de-118 THEORIES OF MOTIVATION

sired behavior is followed by the reinforcer. This approach often is not practical in a complex work environment in which managers supervise many employees. Although continuous reinforcement fos-ters rapid learning, it also produces behavior that is subject to rapid extinction, should the reinforcer be removed for any reason. Overall, some kind of partial reinforcement schedule is recommended.

Partial reinforcement, when reinforcement does not occur after every emergence of an oper-ant, is relatively slow but has the advantage of considerable permanence. Four such schedules require discussion:

• Fixed interval—reinforcement occurs when the desired behavior manifests itself after a set period of time has passed since the previous reinforcement.

• Variable interval—reinforcement occurs at some variable interval of time around an average.

• Fixed ratio—reinforcement occurs after a fixed number of desired behaviors are produced.

• Variable ratio—reinforcement occurs after a number of desired responses, with this number changing from one reinforcement to the next, varying around an average.

These schedules are presented in order of anticipated increasing effectiveness. Fixed interval procedures tend to yield cyclical fluctuations with desired behaviors maximized just prior to reinforcement. In general the variable approaches produce slower extinction and more stable performance levels. The variable ratio schedule is considered to be particularly attractive, al-though it may not be as easy to implement. In all instances it is important that the reinforcer follow the desired behavior as closely as possible.

Stages in Developing a Positive Reinforcement Program

Hamner (1974b) and Hamner and Hamner (1976) have set forth certain steps or stages that should be followed in introducing a positive reinforcement program in a company. In essence this is an applied theory of performance maximization. Underlying these statements is the view that posi-tive reinforcement should be maximized and punishment minimized. Furthermore, worker atti-tudes as a cause of behavior are ignored on the grounds that behavior can be fully explained in terms of the work situation and the contingencies of reinforcement.

The first stage is to define performance in strictly behavioral terms and to conduct a perfor-mance audit with the objective of establishing a baseline for measuring future perforperfor-mance. This procedure makes it possible to determine what the current performance situation is, in as objec-tive a manner as possible.

The second stage involves setting specific and reasonable performance goals for each worker, expressed in measurable terms. These goals, however they may be established, are external to the individual; there is no invoking of experiential concepts such as intentions, expectations, and the like.

The third stage is to have the employee maintain a continuing record of work, a schedule of reinforcements. This way it is possible for the individual to picture how current work contrasts with that of the performance audit stage and with the goals established in stage two. The objective is to create a situation in which behavior that will warrant positive reinforcement occurs. One way of doing this is to shorten the time intervals of measurement as much as possible.

The fourth stage is described as follows:

The supervisor looks at the self-feedback report of the employee and/or other indications of performance (e.g., sales records) and then praises the positive aspects of the employee’s performance (as determined by the performance audit and goals set). This extrinsic

rein-OPERANT BEHAVIOR AND ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR MODIFICATION 119 forcement should strengthen the desired performance, while the withholding of praise for the performance which falls below the goal should give the employee incentive to improve that level of performance. Since the worker already knows the areas of his or her deficien-cies, there is no reason for the supervisor to criticize . . . use of positive reinforcement leads to a greater feeling of self-control, while the avoidance of negative reinforcement keeps the individual from feeling controlled or coerced. (Hamner 1974b, 285)

Although the above discussion focuses on reinforcement by praise, other approaches may be used as appropriate to the individual’s reinforcement history, including money, freedom to choose one’s activities, opportunity to see oneself achieving, higher status on some dimension, and power over others.