Incentives

["Dirk van Putten" <dvanputten@linear.com>]

Hello DEN:

How do [incentives] motivate and what behavior do the reinforce? This was
the question that I was proposing in relation to learning what theory we
accept. I was trying to identify a theory of behavior, under the part of the
SoPK called Psychology, that I believe goes in opposition the original
posting.

The original posting was, "So our project is to research, by talking to a
whole range of
people, the thinking of the organizations. A simple example - they have
incentive schemes to achieve "X" number of man-hours with no lost time
accidents. They do this because they think that they can "motivate" people.
(theory - incentives motivate.)"

If incentives do not motivate in any way, then the Stimulus Response
Reinforcement theory is bunk, and all motivation is intrinsic; then there is
no such thing as extrinsic motivation.

I was not making a value judgment on SRR, incentives, or target setting.
There may be hidden costs. The result may be destructive. The change in
behavior may be short term and temporary. One may scheme to achieve a reward
(reinforcement) without permanently changing behavior.

I am still confused because we dedicated many threads to the dangers of
target setting. This is confusing to me because implied in the dangers of
target setting is that the incentive of the target may reinforce unwanted
behavior. It is implied that the incentive (to attain the target) affects
behavior, often in a negative way. This is confusing to me. If incentives
and motivation are only intrinsic, then why worry so much about target
setting?

I have re-read Peter Hunter's posting many times. It has caused me to ponder
all day. Maybe I need to learn more and really understand what Peter is
saying. If the greatest incentive is praise for good performance, isn't that
still an incentive which we hope will affect behavior?

Regards,

Dirk van Putten
dvanputten@linear.com