The sounds sense, that the better you pay someone, the harder they work. If they are not lazy. Or if they have enough money from before. Or if they want, can't be bought with money. And so on.Columnist Rolf Marvin Bøe Lindgren
is a psychologist and has also studied computer science and artificial intelligence. He has used his knowledge frequently in the media, most recently in the podcast about personlighetstesten the Big five.Last published posts You may have inherited your personality, For some, abortloven always be brutal Yes thanks to egnethetstester of medical students the School's new separates the Myths about the høybegavede kids
There are quite a lot of or. And this article is all about what we know about this. I'm going to use sellers and mobbeprogrammer as an example. So skip the seller if you are more interested in mobbeprogrammer. Or vice versa.
the Science around how one can vary the environment to get people to behave differently, or in new ways, began with the studies of hungry cats, rats and pigeons that had food, or not given food, if they did things. The most fittest of the results coming presumably from B. F. Skinner, who got the pigeons to play ping-pong and to control the bombs that were released from the aircraft and the continued industrial of his colleague Breland, who created the methods used to get animals to do amazing things at the circus and in films.
But if it is so easy to reward the animals to do everything possible wonder, why is it more difficult with people? Well, here it comes, øh, the secret: the Difference is that those who get the animals to do all kinds of weird, know what they're doing. It is not worse than that.
technical term on the reward in contexts such as this, enhancement. If you give someone something after they have done something, and they then make more of it, then you have given an amplifier. We call it reward whether it works or not, but the word amplifier is reserved for those cases where there actually is a connection.
The basic technical concepts are simple to describe, but difficult to understand. So to put into them, I must unfortunately almost leave to the private initiative, and to carefully me to explain what the research actually shows. The most important lessons is this:An amp works (rule) only if it comes immediately after the behavior you want to reinforce. The seller shall sell more, then the rewards come once the sale is in the box. the
the Amps are everywhere. A bonus is an artificial amplifier. The feeling the seller receives when the customer grabs for the pen to sign, is a natural amplifier. Praise from the teacher when you manage to play a scale, is an artificial amplifier. To hear the beautiful melodies when you play the piano, is a natural amplifier that requires exercise and artificial amplifiers to achieve. Praise, money, self-esteem - all this and much more, can be amplifiers. the
You can't punish away a behavior. For example, you can't get anyone to forget about to be able to ride a bike, no matter how much you penalties. You can at best get people to stop doing things in the vicinity of the punisher. Should you get someone to stop doing something, it is usually far more effective to reinforce a behavior that outperforms. They forget not to ride the bike after getting the driver's license, but, the bikes are normally much rarer. the
Amplifiers changes its value. When pianoeleven have practiced scales many times, pianoeleven tired, and praise can be counterproductive. Perhaps the student stops playing because it is fun, and begins to play just to get praise. The skilled educator knows when the attention should from from that student for praise to be clever to practice, that the learner gets the credit for actually getting something back for the practice - and eventually to the student to praise himself and experience mastery. the
an amplifier with everything that is happening at the same time with the behavior you want to reinforce, whether you want to or not. Therefore, you must be very careful when you amplifier.
the Reason that the bonus schemes does not work, is that the reward comes too long after the behavior that will be rewarded. And again, let's take an example that may not apply for so many, but which, nevertheless, is easy to understand. The seller gets bonus for good sales. What is it that is rewarded, really?
Yes, the seller has done a lot of things. Taken lot of phones. Been on trade fairs. Been in kundemøter. Written offers. Got shut up by his or her better half and also perhaps of the boss. If the seller then get the bonus in the beginning of December, what is it, then, that be rewarded?
To be alive at the beginning of December? For it is the seller, clean actually, make. If not the seller country a good sale just the day, then.
It is to be a seller consists of a whole range of activities. Some of them are boring than others. If belønningsmekanismer to act as amplifiers, they must be up against the things the seller is doing that prevents the sale - delay to take the phones, are reluctant to take in meetings, etc. The problem is that it requires that you know what the seller must do to get sold. It places responsibility not with the seller, but at the seller's head. Much easier, of course, to give the seller all the responsibility and then just give the bonus if it goes well.
But is not there to relieve the seller of responsibility to do a good job, if the seller shall be passed on? But the bonus is a kind of confirmation that the seller must are enticed to do a better job. So why not do it right? And why not take the consequence of that the best amps are usually social? To be seen by the boss, to have someone to talk with when things are slow, to be able to discuss openly what prevents the sale - without having to be afraid that the bonus bust?
Mobbeprogrammene in school is a good illustration. You have found behaviors that prevent bullying, and ways to grow up this behavior. At the same time you shoot the man himself in the foot by rewarding schools that have little bullying. Why?
Yes, when schools with little bullying are rewarded for it, as rewards one not basically behaviors that reduce bullying. One awarding it to report little bullying. In the extent to which the reward serves as the amplifier (that is, to the extent it works), everything that involve low reporting of bullying, including under-reporting, to move mobbeofferet, to consider the events in the schoolyard as milder than they actually were, could be reinforced.
So why reward you results, and not the behavior that gives the results? My irreverent assertion is because it moves the responsibility. If I'm going to reinforce the desired behavior, do I need to know what the desired behavior is, and it is basically my responsibility if I have identified the wrong behavior and do more damage than benefit. By introducing bonus schemes allows me to be able to anything, and I place the responsibility for the results with anyone other than myself.
don't reward results. Reward behaviors that lead to good results. If the reward does not give good results, so use this as feedback that you are doing something wrong, and find out what it is.
If you dare place the responsibility where it belongs, then. Thus, with you. You're also not exempt from amplifiers that go out of your productivity.