Positive Contingencies versus Quotas

Abstract

Using operant reinforcement terms and concepts, two of Deming's 14 principles of management were interpreted and evaluated: (a) drive “fear” out of the work place and (b) don't use performance quotas. Compatibility was recognized between Deming's “fear” principle and Skinner's contention that “aversive” work place contingencies are dysfunctional while dysfunctional effects can be reduced by introducing contingencies of positive reinforcement. Deming and Skinner indicate that “fear” or “aversive” conditions in the work place evoke “countercontrol behavior” that can result in reduced performance. A field experiment in which complex reward schedules modeled from operant schedules of reinforcement comprised a performance improvement intervention among N = 14 telemarketers was described. Individual telemarketer performance data provided evidence of countercontrol by two telemarketers in response to a quota system and performance improvements among all telemarketers during the intervention. Implications of observed results for the following were discussed: (a) validity of advice Deming and Skinner offered supervisors and managers, and (b) subsequent research regarding conditions under which countercontrol is evoked and its consequences.

Key Words:

• Telemarketers
• countercontrol
• establishing operations
• contingency specifying statements
• individual quotas
• group goals
• group quotas
• incentive lottery/raffle
• performance fedback
• performance improvement