Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
(UITS)
An Assignment
On
Reinforcement
Submitted By:
Rafiqul awal
ID: 09410066
Student of BBA.
UITS.
Submitted To:
Instructor Name: Sadia Tanzeem
Lecturer,
School of Business,
UITS.
Submission Date: 1 June, 2011.
Shaping Behavior
When a systematic attempt is made to change individuals’ behavior by directing their
learning in graduated steps, it is called shaping behavior. There are four methods of
Shaping Behavior. They are as follows:
For example, i) Bonuses paid at the end of a successful business year are an example of
positive reinforcement. ii) Employees will work hard for a raise or a promotion. iii)
Salesmen will increase their efforts to get rewards and bonuses. iv) Students will study to
get good grades, and v) In these examples, the rises, promotions, awards, bonuses, good
grades, are positive reinforces.
Schedules of Reinforcement:
Research on Reinforcement Theory, like any other research, must be conducted using
rigorous methods (Redmond, 2010). According to Stangor (2007), the set of
assumptions, rules and procedures that scientists use to conduct research is called the
scientific method. The scientific method increases objectivity by placing the data under
the scrutiny of fellow scientists and informs them of the methods used to collect the data.
This allows other scientists to make their own conclusions about the data and even ask
new questions that inspire new research, thus building on the accumulated knowledge of
the specific phenomena/subject (Stangor, 2007).
In a study by Del Chiaro (2006), the use of verbal positive reinforcement as a means
of improving employee job satisfaction was examined. Five supervisors were trained in
the use of verbal positive reinforcement. The supervisor's employees then completed job
satisfaction surveys following job training during a baseline, intervention, and post-test
phase (Del Chiaro, 2006).
Analysis of the results of the employee surveys revealed no clear patterns, but when
the means of all the supervisors were added, there was a small increase in job satisfaction
ratings. Since the validity data the supervisors submitted was incomplete, the small
increase could not be solely attributed to the verbal positive reinforcement (Del Chiaro,
2006). Del Chiaro (2006), however, concludes that, based on the data, "training
supervisors in the use of positive verbal reinforcement has no negative effect on
employee job satisfaction" (p. 3434). According to this study, verbal positive
reinforcement may increase job satisfaction slightly, but it is more likely that it does not
decrease job satisfaction.
(Raj, Nelson, & Rao, 2006) conducted two field experiments in the Business
Information Technology Department of a major retail industry to analyze the impact of
positive task performance reinforcers. The groups created consisted of employees that
either: performed complex tasks or performed relatively simple tasks. Each group was
then broken into subgroups for a total of 4 groups. The complex group was reinforced
with money and paid leave and outcome and process feedback. The simple group was
reinforced with an informal dress code and flexible working hours.
REINFORCERS FOR G1
There were 36 employees that made up this group and their daily jobs were to develop
new software, train employees on the new software, accounting, and auditing. One
subgroup (18 employees) received discounts on products sold by the company and were
offered paid leave for an additional half day every month. The monetary reinforcer
worked well and employee purchases at the retail store almost doubled after the
reinforcers were used. The second subgroup (18 employees) of group G1 received
outcome and process feedback. Outcome feedback communicated to the employee what
their performance level was against the set standard. (Raj, Nelson, & Rao, 2006) Process
feedback conveyed to each employee how the performance was executed, and, more
importantly, as to what should be done in future to improve their performance. (Raj,
Nelson, & Rao, 2006)
REINFORCERS FOR G2
This group of employees (40 in number) performed simple task. They were allowed to
choose their own reinforcers along as they weren’t monetary. All of the 40 employees
were asked to list what would motivate them and make them feel comfortable in their
work spot, which in turn would lead to an increase in their performance. (Raj, Nelson, &
Rao, 2006) The biggest reinforcer chose was informal dress code. Out of 40 employees,
23 of them selected this reinforcer. They believed it wasn’t necessary to have a dress
code because they didn’t deal with the customers. Plus, the formal dress code made them
very uncomfortable because of the weather in India.
The remaining 17 employees that made up G2 viewed working hours that were
flexible would be the best reinforcer. They suggested that management allow them to
leave early in lean seasons as soon as the task assigned to them for that day was
completed. (Raj, Nelson, & Rao, 2006) When the season was at its peak the same
workers would work longer hours to ensure all tasks were completed before leaving.
RESULTS FOR G1
The aggregate behavior of G11 came down from 809.06 during the intervention period
to 723.89 during the post intervention period, whereas the aggregate behavior of G12
showed a slight increase 832.72 during the intervention period of 835.39 during his post
intervention period. (Raj, Nelson, & Rao, 2006)
Money and social recognition are better reinforcers than feedback for less complex
tasks according to previous literature. This experiment shows that providing suggestions
and information for future improvement has a more enduring benefit than does the use of
monetary discounts combined with increased paid leave. (Raj, Nelson, & Rao, 2006)
RESULTS FOR G2
After the experiment was over G2’s performance decreased after 6 months. However
it didn’t return to the baseline frequency level. (Raj, Nelson, & Rao, 2006)
Reinforcement was successful, but management needs to come up with new
reinforcements to maintain a high level of performance among employees. Besides an
increase in job performance there was an increase in satisfaction for G2. Their attitudes
were better than before, their willingness to do the jobs assigned to them was higher, and
their spirits were high. (Raj, Nelson, & Rao, 2006)
1) To increase productivity
2) To reduce absenteeism
(Redmond, 2010)
While OB Mod can help to motivate a change in behavior within organizations, there are
ethical concerns that need to be considered in the use of OB Mod in an organization. The
first ethical consideration is that OB Mod can compromise an individual’s freedom of
choice. The best interest of the employee is not always considered when the
reinforcement strategy is implemented. The OB Mod may benefit the organization by
increasing production but may not improve the situation for the employee through
personal or professional growth. The second ethical consideration is that of potential
manipulation. When the desired behaviors are set in place by the managers, the
employees may feel as though they have little or no choice but to follow the behaviors
suggested by management. OB Mod, like other behavior motivation techniques,
possesses the potential for misuse. (Griffin, Moorehead, 2010)