Wilder and Gravina et al. (2021) Chapter 32.pdf

CHAP TER 32 Organizational Behavior Management David A. Wilder and Nicole E. Gravina Behavior analysts have used behavioral principles pothetical/deductive model of research, in which successfully in a range of settings and with a vari- an investigator tests a hypothesis to determine the e...

CHAP TER 32 Organizational Behavior Management David A. Wilder and Nicole E. Gravina Behavior analysts have used behavioral principles pothetical/deductive model of research, in which successfully in a range of settings and with a vari- an investigator tests a hypothesis to determine the ety of populations. We refer to the application of likelihood of its validity, is generally not the focus these principles to individuals and groups in busi- in behavior analysis. Instead, behavior-analytic ness, industry, government, and human-service researchers focus on manipulation of individual settings as organizational behavior management environmental variables of interest. Subsequent (OBM). In this chapter, we first provide a descrip- studies are based on the results of previous re- tion of OBM and its relation to applied behavior search with no formal tested hypothesis (Wilder, analysis and industrial–organizational psychology. Austin, & Casella, 2009). Next, we briefly review the history of OBM. Final- OBM is also related to the field of industrial– ly, we examine the various subdisciplines of OBM. organizational psychology, in that the focus of In doing so, we focus on common assessment and both disciplines is the application of psychologi- intervention strategies in each. cal or behavioral knowledge to work settings (see Bucklin, Alvero, Dickinson, Austin, & Jackson, 2000, for a comparison). The Hawthorne studies, OBM AND RELATED DISCIPLINES conducted in the 1920s at an electric power plant in Illinois, influenced the two fields. One of the OBM is a branch of applied behavior analysis, main findings of the Hawthorne studies was that a which is a branch of the discipline of behav- variety of environmental changes in work settings, ior analysis or the science of behavior. Behavior including simply observing employees, can affect analysis also includes the experimental analysis worker performance and productivity. of behavior (the basic science branch of the dis- Beyond these similarities, however, the two cipline) and behaviorism (the conceptual or theo- fields differ in several ways. First, industrial–orga- retical branch of the discipline). Applied behavior nizational psychology has an eclectic conceptual analysis consists of the application of operant and, background. It derives the concepts on which it to a lesser extent, respondent principles to behav- is based from several theoretical orientations. By iors of social significance. Unlike mainstream psy- contrast, OBM has a strictly behavior-analytic chology, behavior analysis has a unified theoreti- orientation. A second difference between the two cal approach, behaviorism, and uses an inductive disciplines is the techniques in which the prac- model of investigation. The more traditional hy- titioners of the two fields engage. Industrial–or- 544  Organizational Behavior Management 545 ganizational psychologists spend much of their sales by over $2 million in a single year (O’Brien, professional time on selection and placement of Dickinson, & Rosow, 1982, p. 459). Fortune maga- employees in organizations. By contrast, OBM zine featured a story about this success, which did practitioners spend most of their time assessing the much to expand familiarity with OBM in the busi- variables contributing to employee performance ness world. The discipline expanded rapidly in the deficits and developing programs to improve per- late 1960s and 1970s, with professionals founding formance for individual employees and systems. A consulting firms such as Praxis and Behavioral third difference between the two disciplines is the Systems, Inc., and researchers founding the flag- topics that each discipline studies. Industrial–or- ship journal in the field, the Journal of Organiza- ganizational psychologists typically study person- tional Behavior Management. The first editor of the nel selection and placement, organizational cul- Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, ture, and leadership/decision making, and often Aubrey Daniels, was also the founder of one of the use correlational or between-participants designs first OBM consulting firms, Behavioral Systems, in their research. OBM researchers typically study Inc. Interestingly, Fran Tarkenton, a famed quar- performance management (Griffin, Gravina, terback for the Minnesota Vikings and New York Matey, Pritchard, & Wine, 2019), safety (Gravina, Giants, cofounded this company. Daniels later left King, & Austin, 2019), and organizational systems Behavioral Systems and founded Aubrey Daniels (Kelley & Gravina, 2018), and often use within- and Associates, which eventually became Aubrey participants designs in their research (Bucklin et Daniels International. Aubrey Daniels Interna- al., 2000; Vergason & Gravina, 2020). The disci- tional remains one of the top OBM consulting plines also differ in size. The Society for Industrial firms (Dickinson, 2001). and Organizational Psychology represents indus- The mission of the Journal of Organizational trial–organizational psychology and has more Behavior Management was and still is to publish than 9,600 members (www.siop.org/benefits). The articles on “scientific principles to improve orga- Organizational Behavior Management Network nizational performance through behavior change” represents OBM, is a special-interest group of the (http://obmnetwork.com/publications/journal-of- Association for Behavior Analysis International, organizational-behavior-management-jobm). The and has fewer than 500 members (H. McGee, per- journal publishes both conceptual and applied ar- sonal communication, May 11, 2016). ticles, highlights reports from the field, and invites both academics and practitioners to contribute. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management is A BRIEF HISTORY OF OBM the official journal of the Organizational Behavior Management Network. The precursors to OBM as a discipline date as A few specific topic areas have developed far back as the 1950s (see Dickinson, 2001). B. F. throughout OBM’s history, to the point that we Skinner’s 1953 text Science and Human Behavior now consider them subdisciplines. These include included a chapter on “Economic Control” and in- performance management (Daniels & Bailey, troduced ideas about wage schedules and differen- 2014), behavioral safety (McSween, 2003), and tially reinforcing high-quality work performance. behavioral-systems analysis (Rummler & Brache, Many magazines and journals in the1960s, includ- 2012). ing the Harvard Business Review and the Journal of Advertising Research, published articles on manag- ing performance. In addition, a formal organiza- PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT tion devoted to performance improvement, the International Society for Performance Improve- Although some use the terms performance manage- ment, was established in 1962. Many founding ment and OBM synonymously, we consider perfor- International Society for Performance Improve- mance management a subdiscipline of OBM. The ment members were behavior analysts (Dickinson, focus in performance management is on assessing 2001). and changing the performance of individuals or Perhaps the most widely publicized application groups of employees to increase productivity and of OBM took place at Emery Air Freight in the late efficiency. Performance management is often 1960s. Edward Feeney, a sales manager at Emery, conducted in a step-by-step fashion. The major used a behavioral-systems package that he learned steps include pinpointing or operationally defin- about in an OBM workshop to increase Emery ing a target performance; developing a system to 546 S U B S P E C I A LT IE S I N A P P L IE D B E H AV I O R A N A LY S I S measure the target performance; assessing the en- sessing a performance problem. He arranged their vironmental variables that contribute to the oc- responses into four categories: antecedents and currence of the target performance; intervening information; equipment and processes; knowledge on the target performance; assessing the social and skills; and consequences. Austin created a list validity, costs, and benefits of the intervention; of three to six questions for each category and a and evaluating the maintenance of performance dichotomous response system. Austin intended change. This step-by-step process has produced that consultants, managers, or supervisors would substantial performance improvements in organi- use the tool to identify targeted interventions to zations large and small, in the public and private improve employee performance. The first empiri- sector, and in many industries (Daniels & Bailey, cal demonstration of the Performance Diagnostic 2014). Checklist took place in a store in a shopping mall. The store was experiencing chronic cash short- ages for each cash register at the end of shifts. Assessment The researchers used the Performance Diagnostic Assessment in performance management consists Checklist to examine potential variables that ex- of evaluating the reinforcers supporting both the plained the cash shortages. Eight customer-service performance targeted for change and the alterna- representatives at the store served as participants. tive or desired performance. Consultants com- The Performance Diagnostic Checklist identified monly use the PIC/NIC analysis (Daniels & Bai- the equipment and processes and the consequence ley, 2014). In a PIC/NIC analysis, the consultant categories as problematic. Using these results, the analyzes whether the target performance and an researchers changed employee assignments during alternative performance produce positive, imme- shifts and delivered verbal and posted feedback. diate, and certain consequences versus negative, The intervention reduced the cash shortage at the future, and uncertain consequences. The PIC in store dramatically (Rohn, Austin, & Lutrey, 2003). the PIC/NIC analysis represents positive, immedi- Researchers have used the Performance Diag- ate, and certain; the NIC represents negative, im- nostic Checklist since then to identify the vari- mediate, and certain. When conducting a PIC/NIC ables responsible for poor employee performance analysis, the manager or consultant categorizes in many settings, including a coffee shop (Pampi- the possible performance consequences as either no, Heering, Wilder, Barton, & Burson, 2004), a positive, immediate, and certain, or negative, fu- department store (Eikenhout & Austin, 2005), a ture, and uncertain. Those consequences that are retail framing and art store (Pampino, MacDon- positive, immediate, and certain are highly likely ald, Mullin, & Wilder, 2004), restaurants (Amigo, to influence performance. The consultant’s job Smith, & Ludwig, 2008; Austin, Weatherly, & is to adjust the positive, immediate, and certain Gravina, 2005; Rodriguez et al., 2006), and a consequences so that they occur after the desired health clinic (Gravina, VanWagner, & Austin, performance. 2008). The Performance Diagnostic Checklist A study by Doll, Livesey, McHaffie, and Ludwig has become a common assessment tool in perfor- (2007) nicely illustrates this tool. The researchers mance management and has recently been adapt- analyzed cleaning performance by employees at a ed for specialized settings, topics, and populations ski shop. Their PIC/NIC analysis found that the (e.g., Smith & Wilder, 2018). consequences for cleaning were often negative, in Researchers have recently adapted the Perfor- that cleaning the store took time away from inter- mance Diagnostic Checklist for human-service acting with customers and required physical labor. settings (Carr, Wilder, Majdalany, Mathisen, & The researchers implemented an intervention that Strain, 2013). Although performance manage- reversed the PIC/NIC analysis results. After the ment in particular and OBM in general can be intervention, cleaning produced positive conse- applied in any setting, Carr et al. (2013) argued quences, such as comments from a supervisor and that human-service settings are sufficiently differ- a graph depicting cleaning performance. ent from for-profit settings to warrant a specialized Another common form of assessment in per- version of the Performance Diagnostic Checklist. formance management is an informant-based The Performance Diagnostic Checklist—Human tool called the Performance Diagnostic Check- Services includes questions designed specifically list (Austin, 2000). Austin developed the Per- for employee performance problems likely to be formance Diagnostic Checklist by asking expert encountered in schools, clinics, group homes, OBM consultants what they do when initially as- and hospitals. Unlike the original Performance  Organizational Behavior Management 547 Diagnostic Checklist, it also includes a direct-ob- task clarification meeting and found that the em- servation component and a list of suggested inter- ployees who received the intervention performed ventions matched to the results. Carr et al. used well, but those who did not performed poorly. the Performance Diagnostic Checklist—Human Researchers have used task clarification in many Services to evaluate poor preparation of therapy other studies, with similar results (e.g., Austin et rooms by therapists at a university-affiliated clinic al., 2005; Choi, Johnson, Moon, & Oah, 2018; for early, intensive behavior intervention. The re- Durgin, Mahoney, Cox, Weetjens, & Poling, 2014; sults suggested that a lack of proper training and Palmer & Johnson, 2013). insufficient feedback were responsible for the per- Another common antecedent-based interven- formance deficits. During the intervention, the re- tion in performance management is training. searchers trained the therapists to prepare therapy Sasson and Austin (2005) evaluated the effects rooms adequately. They also provided graphed of training to increase correct ergonomic per- feedback on the therapists’ performance. The in- formance among office workers. The training tervention was effective; mean correct preparation consisted of a one-on-one meeting in which the of therapy rooms greatly improved during the in- instructor first described correct wrist, neck, and tervention. Interestingly, the researchers also im- shoulder positions when typing on a keyboard. plemented an intervention that was not based on Next, the instructor modeled the correct posi- Performance Diagnostic Checklist—Human Ser- tions. Finally, each participant demonstrated the vices results, and it was ineffective, suggesting that correct performance, and the instructor provided the Performance Diagnostic Checklist—Human feedback. Training in performance management Services correctly identified an appropriate inter- often follows this three-step model of description, vention. Ditzian, Wilder, King, and Tanz (2015) modeling, and feedback. In addition, training in replicated this study with a different dependent performance management is often criterion based, variable and obtained similar results. which means that the learner or employee must meet a mastery criterion before completing train- ing (Howard & DiGennaro Reed, 2015). Notably, Intervention although researchers commonly use training, its We can divide performance management inter- effectiveness without other performance manage- ventions into two broad categories: antecedent- ment interventions is often modest. For example, based and consequence-based procedures. Anteced- Sasson and Austin (2005) added feedback and em- ent-based interventions include task clarification, ployee involvement in conducting observations of training, manipulation of the effort required to peer performance to increase performance to high perform a task, and goal setting. Consequence- levels. Other performance management studies based interventions include feedback and incen- (Nordstrom, Lorenzi, & Hall, 1991) and reports tives or contingent access to money or work perks. from the field (Haberlin, Beauchamp, Agnew, & Researchers commonly use antecedent-based O’Brien, 2012) have also used training. interventions to address performance problems Reducing the effort required to perform a task, in performance management. Task clarification often called reduced response effort, is another ante- consists of reviewing employee responsibilities re- cedent-based performance management interven- lated to the deficient target performance. Some- tion. Abellon and Wilder (2014) reduced the dis- times the tasks an employee is responsible for are tance that employees had to travel to use protective posted in a salient location. Rice, Austin, and eyewear in a manufacturing facility, thereby reduc- Gravina (2009) used task clarification to improve ing the effort of accessing the eyewear. They found the customer-service behaviors of employees at a that employees used protective eyewear much grocery store. The researchers taught the manager more often when it was close to their workstations. to clarify how employees were supposed to greet Brothers, Klantz, and McClannahan (1994) ma- customers and what to say to them at the end of an nipulated the proximity of recycling containers to interaction. Researchers taught the manager to de- office workers, thereby reducing the effort required liver social praise contingent on correct employee to recycle documents. They found that recycling performance. The intervention was effective; cor- increased substantially when recycling containers rect employee performance improved from a mean were close to employees. Other studies have also of fewer than 15% of opportunities to more than demonstrated using reduced response effort to im- 60% of opportunities. In addition, the researchers prove employee performance (Casella et al., 2010; collected follow-up data 48 weeks after the initial Ludwig, Gray, & Rowell, 1998). 548 S U B S P E C I A LT IE S I N A P P L IE D B E H AV I O R A N A LY S I S Goal setting is another strategy researchers have Marshall, Bellizzi, & Wilder, 2013), and to improve used to improve employee performance. Goals for employee performance in an aluminum smelt improving performance should be challenging but manufacturing facility (Jessup & Stahelski, 1999). achievable and should be set in collaboration with Pampino, Wilder, and Binder (2005) evaluated the employees. Several studies have evaluated goal feedback as a component of an intervention to setting. For example, Downing and Geller (2012) increase accurate record keeping and submission used goal setting with feedback to increase the of time sheets by construction foremen building a frequency with which cashiers in a large grocery neighborhood. The feedback was part of a train- store checked customer identification to prevent ing procedure that required foremen to practice identity theft. Identification checks increased the correct performance repeatedly; they received from under 1% to nearly 10% due to the interven- immediate feedback on several aspects of their tion. The researchers used participative goal set- performance. These and other applications of ting, which means that they asked each cashier feedback illustrate the robust nature of this inter- for assistance in setting individual goals. Other vention. performance management studies also have used One common and popular form of feedback is goal setting effectively (Amigo et al., 2008; Loewy the sandwich method, in which a supervisor pro- & Bailey, 2007). vides positive comments about an employee’s By far the most common consequence-based performance, followed by a comment describing intervention in performance management is feed- what the employee is doing incorrectly, followed back (Alvero, Bucklin, & Austin, 2001). Although by another positive comment. Research does not feedback can be an antecedent, such as when it support the effectiveness of sandwich feedback. is presented immediately before a performance Henley and DiGennaro Reed (2015) compared opportunity, we review it here as a consequence- the feedback sandwich (positive–corrective–posi- based procedure. Researchers have evaluated many tive) to other sequences of feedback (positive–pos- characteristics of feedback, such as the person who itive–corrective and corrective–positive–positive), delivers feedback (peer, supervisor, consultant), and found that the corrective–positive–positive the frequency of feedback delivery (immediate, sequence was most effective, although the differ- daily, weekly, monthly), and the format in which ences among the sequences were small. Interest- feedback is delivered (oral, written, graphic). In ingly, these authors also looked at the timing of general, research has found that feedback is most feedback delivery. They delivered feedback either effective when someone with authority over an immediately after performance or just before the employee, such as a supervisor, delivers feedback; next opportunity participants had to perform the when the feedback provider uses it frequently, ide- task. They found no differences in performance ally immediately, daily, or weekly; and when the based on the timing of the feedback. feedback is in an easy-to-understand graphic for- Another consequence-based performance man- mat (Alvero et al., 2001). Ludwig, Biggs, Wagner, agement intervention consists of incentives or and Geller (2002) used publicly posted feedback access to money or other work perks contingent to increase the correct driving performance of 82 on improved performance. Several studies have pizza delivery drivers. Specifically, the research- found that incentive or pay-for-performance sys- ers targeted using turn signals, using safety belts, tems result in more productive performance than and coming to a complete stop at intersections. salary-based or hourly pay systems (Long, Wilder, Researchers posted employees’ driving scores on Betz, & Dutta, 2012; Oah & Lee, 2011; Slowiak, a public graph that included each driver’s name. Dickinson, & Huitema, 2011). Thurkow, Bailey, Correct driving increased by 17–22% above base- and Stamper (2000) compared the effects of three line levels. Other performance management stud- types of incentive pay systems on the performance ies have used feedback to improve performance of telephone company employees. The researchers (Palmer & Johnson, 2013; So, Lee, & Oah, 2013). found that both individual and group incentives Researchers have used feedback to improve per- produced better performance than that during formance in many settings with a variety of em- baseline. Individual incentives produced the high- ployees. For example, researchers have used feed- est rate of employee performance. back to improve the performance of supervisors Although we have been describing each per- and animal trainers in a nongovernmental orga- formance management intervention individually, nization in east Africa (Durgin et al., 2014), to in- most performance management interventions in- crease credit card use in a retail setting (Loughrey, clude more than one component. So-called pack-  Organizational Behavior Management 549 age interventions increase the likelihood of the 2000). One meta-analysis of behavioral-safety ap- interventions’ effectiveness. Unfortunately, the plications reported a reduction in injuries in 32 specific component or components most respon- of 33 studies reviewed (Sulzer-Azaroff & Austin, sible for the effectiveness of the package interven- 2000). The settings included construction sites, tion are often difficult to identify. For that reason, utility companies, manufacturing plants, mines, we encourage performance management research- and shipyards; most were in the United States, ers and practitioners to introduce intervention but some were in other countries. A more recent components systematically, one at a time. behavioral-safety meta-analysis with more strin- gent inclusion criteria found a reduction in in- juries in 12 of 13 studies evaluated (Tuncel, Lot- BEHAVIORAL SAFETY likar, Salem, & Daraiseh, 2006). The techniques researchers use in behavioral-safety applications Behavioral safety is the use of behavior-analytic can vary, depending on the unique needs of a site principles and techniques to improve safe per- and assessment findings. Therefore, Tuncel et al. formance (Krause, 1997). The Journal of Organi- (2006) have recommended that researchers clearly zational Behavior Management published the first report assessment methods and results in behav- OBM study addressing safety in 1978 (Komaki, ioral safety, so that they can more closely link as- Barwick, & Scott, 1978). Shortly afterward, Fox, sessment to intervention selection. Hopkins, and Anger (1987) began working on one of the longest-running evaluations of a behav- Assessment ioral approach to improving safety in a coal mine and in a uranium ore mine. Many other behavior One of the first activities that usually occurs in a analysts have contributed to the development and behavioral-safety implementation is a safety assess- evolution of behavioral safety since then, includ- ment. A safety assessment has several objectives, ing Sulzer-Azaroff (1980), McSween (1995), Geller including (1) identifying behaviors and conditions (1996), and Daniels and Agnew (2010). Today, to target that are likely to have an impact on safe- behavioral safety is one of the most popular ap- ty and injury reduction, (2) identifying variables proaches to increasing safe performance in many that influence the targets, (3) understanding the industries (e.g., Hagge, McGee, Matthews, & Ab- context in which those behaviors and conditions erle, 2017). occur, (4) identifying existing safety programs, The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) re- and (5) building employee and management sup- ported that nearly 4 million workplace injuries port (Agnew & Snyder, 2008; McSween, 2003). and illnesses and over 4,600 workplace fatalities in A consultant reviews workplace practices and the United States occurred in 2014 (BLS, 2014a). policies and current safety initiatives and programs Safety-related incidents and injuries have been on in a behavioral-safety assessment (McSween, the decline for many years, due to a greater under- 2003). Initiatives and programs often emphasize standing of ways to prevent them and an increased areas the organization views as deficient and may focus on reducing them. Although workplace in- provide clues for behavioral targets. In addition, juries are declining, fatalities have flat-lined (BLS, the consultant gathers information about the site, 2014b), which has produced a new focus on process including number of employees, supervisors, man- safety (Occupational Health and Safety Adminis- agers, nature of the work, union affiliation, worker tration, 2000). Process safety includes identifying age, rate of turnover, and shift scheduling. strategies to influence safe behaviors and noticing The consultant reviews data on injuries; inci- and reporting safety concerns—things that be- dents; close calls; and environmental issues, when havioral safety is well suited to address (Bogard, applicable (e.g., spills at a chemical manufacturing Ludwig, Staats, & Kretschmer, 2015). site) for the previous 2–5 years (McSween, 2003). The popularity of behavioral safety is likely The goal is to uncover trends in how, when, where, due to its effectiveness for increasing safe behav- and why injuries and incidents occur. This may iors and reducing injuries (Krause, Seymour, & require grouping the data by area, job, body part Sloat, 1999). Many studies have demonstrated a injured, task, shift, and other variables, to deter- reduction in injuries, and even more have demon- mine behaviors that may be valuable safety targets strated an increase in safe behaviors after the use and situations in which injuries are more likely to of behavioral-safety techniques (Grindle, Dickin- occur. In addition to the site-specific data, safety son, & Boettcher, 2000; Sulzer-Azaroff & Austin, information on the specific industry or job may 550 S U B S P E C I A LT IE S I N A P P L IE D B E H AV I O R A N A LY S I S provide more ideas for safety targets. For example, consequences discourage behaviors. Often, safety- certified nursing assistants often have back inju- related behaviors do not have positive, immediate, ries while transferring patients; therefore, patient certain consequences, or may even have negative, lifting may be an important target for reducing immediate, uncertain consequences. The reverse these employees’ back injuries (BLS, 2011). is often true for at-risk behavior. For example, The assessment should also include interviews, wearing a hard hat may feel hot and uncomfort- a survey, and direct observation to gather more able, which are negative, immediate, and certain information on the workplace’s context, potential consequences. Working without it may produce targets, and safety culture. The consultant should social support for being “tough” and completing conduct interviews with front-line workers, super- work faster, which are positive, immediate con- visors, managers, and leaders, to learn about safety sequences. Changing this behavior involves at- challenges at the site from multiple perspectives tempting to adjust the consequences it produces. (McSween, 2003). Using an anonymous survey This level of analysis for safety targets allows for a with behaviorally oriented questions is a low-effort more customized behavioral-safety process. way to identify safety concerns that may warrant The safety assessment should produce a report further investigation. For example, most workers that lists behaviors and conditions that a behav- disagreeing with the statement “All injuries on ior-based safety intervention can target and rec- this site are reported” may indicate that someone ommendations for intervention components. In has punished injury reporting in the past, and that addition, the assessment may indicate the start- gathering accurate data in this area may require ing point for intervention, who to involve in the concerted effort. Or employees reporting that process, the cultural challenges, and when to start. their supervisor talks to them about safety less We describe the steps in behavioral-safety inter- than once per month may indicate that engaging ventions next. supervisors in the behavioral-safety process will be important. Surveys are often followed by direct ob- Intervention servation to verify accuracy. The consultant may include several OBM tools Although there is some variation, practitioners in an assessment to facilitate a better understand- and consultants use the following steps in the ing of why at-risk behaviors are occurring. For behavioral-safety process: (1) Form a safety com- example, the Performance Diagnostic Checklist— mittee; (2) identify behaviors and conditions to Safety provides a list of questions aimed at identi- target; (3) develop a measurement system; (4) cre- fying potential factors impeding safe performance ate a feedback, reinforcement, and problem-solv- and directions for intervention selection (Marti- ing plan; and (5) continually improve the process nez-Onstott, Wilder, & Sigurdsson, 2016). Like (Austin, 2006; Agnew & Snyder, 2008; McSween, similar assessments in OBM, the questionnaire 2003). The safety committee usually consists of covers four areas: antecedents and information; representatives from the workforce, supervisors, knowledge and skills; equipment and processes; safety department (if one exists), and leadership and consequences. Research has shown that in- (McSween, 2003). The safety committee manages terventions selected from the results of a perfor- the behavioral-safety process, which is often de- mance diagnostic checklist are effective (Johnson, scribed as employee-led (Krause, 1995). Research Casella, McGee, & Lee, 2014). in OBM suggests that participation by employees An antecedent–behavior–consequence (A-B- may increase the impact of the intervention (Sig- C) analysis can also provide valuable insight for urdsson & Austin, 2006), and behavioral-safety understanding antecedents and consequences that practitioners suggest that employee participation may influence safe and at-risk behaviors (Health increases acceptance and maintenance of behav- and Safety Executive, 2012). A typical A-B-C ioral-safety programs (Geller, 2002). Research has analysis examines both the desired and undesired also demonstrated that participation in setting behaviors and lists antecedents and consequences safety goals may have a positive impact on perfor- for each. The consultant scores each behavior as mance (Fellner & Sulzer-Azaroff, 1985). The safe- positive or negative, immediate or future, and cer- ty committee is one way that the behavioral-safety tain or uncertain (Daniels & Bailey, 2014). Posi- process increases employee engagement. tive, immediate, and certain consequences encour- The consultant uses the safe behaviors and age behaviors, and negative, immediate, uncertain conditions the safety assessment has identified to  Organizational Behavior Management 551 create an observations checklist. Such checklists intervention, plus goal setting and supervisor often include a space for describing barriers to per- praise, produced a dramatic improvement in safe formance (Austin, 2006). The observations can performance. The researchers also trained an em- improve worker safety, produce better hazard rec- ployee to continue the intervention. ognition, produce improved feedback on safe per- An intervention package can also include in- formance, provide information for more focused centives for improving safety. McSween (2003) safety intervention targets, and create social con- suggests offering a menu of awards and incentives sequences for performing safely (McSween, 2003). in a tiered fashion based on effort. Hickman and Additionally, the observation process may lever- Geller (2005) provided a small incentive ($1 per age the observer effect, which occurs when a per- self-observation form) to short-haul truck drivers son conducting an observation improves his or her for completing self-observations before or after own safe behaviors (Alvero & Austin, 2004). Peer each shift. Participation in the prebehavior group observations are the most common, but research was 42%, and participation in the postbehavior has shown that self-observations increase safe be- group was 75%. Both groups demonstrated an im- haviors and are a good alternative for employees provement in overspeed and extreme braking. At who work alone (e.g., Hickman & Geller, 2005; the other end of the spectrum, Fox et al. (1987) Olson & Austin, 2001). Employees only (e.g., Coo- created an elaborate token-economy reward sys- per, Phillips, Sutherland, & Makin, 1994), super- tem for behaving safely and avoiding injuries at visors only (e.g., Chhokar & Wallin, 1984), both, two mines. Workers could exchange the tokens everyone in the organization, or outside observers in the local community to purchase products and only (e.g., Ludwig & Geller, 1997) can conduct the services. The intervention produced a substantial observations. The observation checklist serves as reduction in injuries. Although it cost between the basis for the measurement system. $9,000 and $22,000 per year per site, the return The observation and feedback process can also on investment was substantial, ranging from 13:1 focus on supervisory and leader behavior. For ex- to 28:1 depending on the year. The intervention ample, Cooper (2006) evaluated the impact of had been in place for 10 years when the study was management support in a behavioral-safety pro- published, demonstrating long-term maintenance cess in a paper mill. Cooper asked employees to of a behavioral-safety program. complete a checklist that indicated whether lead- There are several other considerations in de- ers with whom they interacted that week provided signing a behavioral-safety intervention. For ex- visible ongoing support. An exploratory analysis ample, conducting observations can be mandatory showed statistically significant correlations be- or voluntary and can be scheduled daily, weekly, tween visible ongoing support from leaders and monthly, or even less frequently. Observation safety performance of employees, ranging from.47 checklists can be lengthy or brief. Observers can to.72 in the three areas included in the study, al- announce their presence and give feedback, or can though the effects seemed to diminish over time. observe discreetly and not provide feedback in the Zohar and Luria (2003) examined an intervention moment. Unfortunately, the research available to to increase line supervisors’ safety-related inter- inform these decisions is limited. One study sug- actions and found that safe behaviors and safety gested that mandatory behavioral-safety processes climate scores increased as safety interactions in- produced higher participation and satisfaction creased. Although research on the importance of with behavioral-safety interventions than volun- manager engagement in safety observations and tary ones (DePasquale & Geller, 2000). Behav- interactions is still limited, this is clearly an av- ioral-safety interventions could benefit from more enue worthy of further investigation and is poten- research on these and related topics. tially an important part of the observation system. Although behavioral safety has had a signifi- After a consultant establishes an observation cant impact on improving safe practices and re- system, he or she uses the data to provide feedback ducing injuries in the workplace, opportunities to to employees and to reinforce progress. Feedback strengthen and refine the practice exist. For exam- delivery often includes graphic, publicly posted ple, the field needs more research to determine the feedback on safe behaviors. For example, Komaki best strategies for implementing a peer observation et al. (1978) used publicly posted graphic feedback system. Whether overt or discrete observations, updated after each observation period to improve long or short checklists, or supervisor-to-employee the safe practices of employees in a bakery. This or peer-to-peer observations yield the most accu- 552 S U B S P E C I A LT IE S I N A P P L IE D B E H AV I O R A N A LY S I S rate data and greatest behavior change is unclear. systems lens may not improve intended results. For In addition, we need to focus on leadership behav- example, Johnson and Frederiksen (1984) con- ior and design, to evaluate interventions that have ducted a study in a mental health institution in a positive impact on leader behavior, and to evalu- which they compared the provision of feedback on ate the impact of changes in leader behavior on process (behavioral) versus outcome (results) mea- worker behavior and safe performance. Also, al- sures. The process intervention increased process though research has demonstrated the efficacy of behaviors but did not affect outcome; the outcome behavioral safety, some behavioral-safety processes intervention did not improve outcome or process are short-lived or meet resistance and never fully behaviors. This suggests that the researchers did take hold in practice. Further investigation into not identify the correct behaviors that would have the factors that produce active, well-received, and improved outcomes. Redmon (1991) suggests that sustained behavioral-safety processes will allow OBM interventions should clearly link to key or- OBM to have an even more substantial impact on ganizational goals. Behavioral-systems analysis workplace safety in the years to come. Finally, we helps OBM to place its effective interventions in need additional research on safety belt use and safe the context of the whole business and align behav- driving in general (see Wilder & Sigurdsson, 2015, ior targets with important goals and results. for a review). Assessment BEHAVIORAL-SYSTEMS ANALYSIS Many tools exist in behavioral-systems analysis to assess organizational systems and processes, Another subdiscipline of OBM is behavioral-sys- although research has empirically evaluated few tems analysis, which involves understanding an of them (Johnson et al., 2014). Rummler and organization by outlining the system’s parts and Brache (2012) examined organizations at three processes and determining how they interact. levels: the organization, the process, and the job Behavioral-systems analysis developed through and performer. The organizational level describes the work of many pioneers in the fields of OBM the organization in the greater context in which and human performance improvement (e.g., Bre- it exists, highlighting inputs, primary processes, thower, 1982; Gilbert, 1996; Glenn, 1988; R. W. outputs, and outside influences and sources of Malott, 1974; M. E. Malott, 2003). OBM tends to feedback (such as competitors, regulations, and focus on specific behaviors. By contrast, behavior- stakeholders). The process level describes how the al-systems analysis emphasizes the broader context work gets done from first input to final output in a in which the behaviors occur and is more likely step-by-step fashion; it includes information about to focus on results such as sales, expenses, and tools, quality checks, and decision points. The job customer service (Abernathy, 2014; Hyten, 2009). and performer level focuses on factors affecting job Some researchers have suggested that OBM should completion that could cause and reduce human adopt a more systemic approach to increase the error and increase worker efficiency. durability of its interventions and its attractive- Assessments at each of these levels are designed ness and relevance to business; behavioral-systems to describe the current or is state of a system or analysis incorporates this approach (Abernathy, process, and to identify opportunities for improv- 2014; Hyten, 2009). ing efficiency, reducing costs, reducing cycle time, Rummler and Brache (2012) argue that the and increasing quality (Sasson, Alvero, & Austin, greatest opportunities for improving overall per- 2006). An assessment often involves using a tool formance and results arise in the handoffs between to create a visual depiction of the level, such as employees or departments, which are often not the the Total Performance System Relationship Map focus of OBM consultations or research. Unless the described by Brethower (1982) or the Process Map entire system is considered, an intervention that described by Rummler and Brache (2012), and a strengthens performance in one area could be det- list of performance deficiencies or opportunities rimental to another (Abernathy, 2014; Rummler for improving the system. In addition, the consul- & Brache, 2012). To illustrate, if manufacturing tant gathers data on current performance levels triples production and sales are unable to keep up, and performance potentials (Gilbert, 1996). The the organization will have spent more money than upper panel of Figure 32.1 depicts an example of necessary on products that it is now forced to store. an is process map for an employee’s trip approval Additionally, behavior targets identified without a process.  Creates travel budget and Makes travel Submits Travels sends for arrangements receipts approval Employee Reviews Reviews budget, signs, signature and and sends for sends back to approval employee Supervisor Reviews budget, signs, and sends back to Manager supervisor Creates travel budget and Makes travel Submits Travels sends for arrangements receipts approval Employee Reviews Reviews budget, signs, signature and and sends for sends back to approval employee Supervisor Manager FIGURE 32.1. The upper panel depicts an is process map for an employee’s trip approval process. The lower panel depicts a should process map for the same process. The consultant 553 determined that manager approval was unnecessary. 554 S U B S P E C I A LT IE S I N A P P L IE D B E H AV I O R A N A LY S I S Assessments in behavioral-systems analysis also behavioral intervention was a graduated monetary involve collecting information in six areas, to iden- bonus for performance on each of the dependent tify root causes of process problems and opportuni- variables. Data analysis showed main effects for ties for improvement: (1) information and expec- the process and the behavioral interventions, but tations; (2) equipment, tools, and resources; (3) the combined intervention produced the greatest consequences and incentives; (4) knowledge and effect. The researchers concluded that process-lev- skills; (5) capacity, ability, and employee selection; el and performer-level interventions may maximize and (6) motives and preferences (Austin, 2000; performance improvements in the workplace. Binder, 1998; Sasson & Austin, 2003). In this way, Cunningham, Geller, and Clarke (2008) com- these assessments are like the Performance Diag- pared a computerized provider order-entry system nostic Checklist (Austin, 2000), which research- to a paper process for ordering medications in a ers and consultants commonly use in performance hospital. The study goal was to determine the ef- management to evaluate individual performance fects on compliance with medication-ordering as discussed above. In behavioral-systems analysis, protocols and time to patients’ receiving their first this information then leads to a systemic interven- dose of antibiotics. The hospital’s goal was for a pa- tion aimed at improving performance and results. tient to receive the first antibiotic dose within 240 minutes of the medication order’s arrival. Results showed that compliance with medication-ordering Intervention protocols was 60% with the computerized system, In behavioral-systems analysis, assessment in- compared to 47% with the paper process. Addi- volves using tools to create a visual depiction and tionally, patients received their first antibiotic greater understanding of the current or is state of a dose within 240 minutes on 78% of opportunities system or process in an organization. Intervention with the computerized system, compared to 55% involves using tools to create a visual depiction of opportunities with the paper process. This study and supports for an improved should or ideal state demonstrated that process changes alone can have that will produce improved performance and then a significant impact on important outcomes in implementing those changes (Rummler & Brache, business. 2012). The consultant usually identifies the im- Although research and practice support using proved state by examining industry knowledge, behavioral-systems analysis to improve perfor- the current state, and associated performance is- mance in organizations, an opportunity to incor- sues, and by interviewing people working in and porate behavioral-systems analysis into OBM re- around the system or process (Austin, 2000; Rum- search exists, even at the job and performer level. mler & Brache, 2012). Using behavioral-systems In a systematic review of the Journal of Organiza- analysis gives people in the organization a com- tional Behavior Management from 1992 to 2001, mon and useful language to communicate about Sasson and Austin (2003) evaluated published performance issues, which facilitates the develop- interventions to determine how many considered ment and implementation of solutions (Binder, the six areas listed above when selecting interven- 1998). The lower panel of Figure 32.1 depicts an tion components. The authors found that only one example of a should process map for an employee’s study considered the six areas (LaFleur & Hyten, trip approval process. The consultant determined 1995). Most only considered up to three (see Fig- that manager approval, shown in the is map in the ure 9 of Sasson & Austin, 2003). They suggested upper panel, was unnecessary and time-consum- that OBM could include more behavioral-systems ing, so the consultant omitted it in the should map. analyses to improve intervention selection, even at The research on interventions devised via the performer level. behavioral-systems analysis is sparse (Johnson et Although behavioral-systems analysis focuses al., 2014). Sasson et al. (2006) conducted an ana- on the effects of context on behavior, and OBM logue study to evaluate the impact of a behavioral focuses on the individual, the two frameworks intervention, a process intervention, and the two should be synergistic. An employee will have dif- interventions combined. Participants completed ficulty succeeding in a poorly designed process or a word-processing task, and the main dependent system (Rummler & Brache, 2012), but effective variables were completion speed and errors. The processes and systems require employees to behave process differences were manual (physically pick- productively. Therefore, a synergistic approach is ing up and dropping off the task) and electronic likely to produce the best outcomes for business (receiving and sending the task by e-mail). The and increased recognition for the field.  Organizational Behavior Management 555 CONCLUSION Bogard, K., Ludwig, T. D., Staats, C., & Kretschmer, D. (2015). An industry’s call to understand the contin- OBM is the application of behavioral principles gencies involved in process safety: Normalization of to improve the performance of employees in or- deviance. Journal of Organizational Behavior Manage- ment, 35(1–2), 70–80. ganizations and is a branch of applied behavior Brethower, D. M. (1982). The Total Performance Sys- analysis. In contrast to industrial–organizational tem. In R. M. O’Brien, A. M. Dickinson, & M. P. psychology, OBM has a theoretically unified ori- Rosow (Eds.), Industrial behavior modification: A entation and focuses on the direct manipulation management handbook (pp. 350–369). New York: Per- of variables that have an important impact on gamon Press. employee well-being and the organization’s bot- Brothers, K. J., Krantz, P. J., & McClannahan, L. E. tom line. Three OBM subdisciplines exist: per- (1994). Office paper recycling: A function of con- formance management, behavioral safety, and tainer proximity. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, behavioral-systems analysis. Each of these includes 27, 153–160. assessment techniques and intervention proce- Bucklin, B. R., Alvero, A. M., Dickinson, A. M., Austin, dures for a variety of organizational problems. J., & Jackson, A. K. (2000). Industrial organizational psychology and organizational behavior manage- ment. Journal of Organizational Behavior Manage- REFERENCES ment, 20(2), 27–75. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). (2011, October 20). Abellon, O. E., & Wilder, D. A. (2014). The effect of Workplace injuries and illnesses—2010 (News re- equipment proximity on safe performance in a manu- lease USDL-11-1502). Retrieved from www.bls.gov/ facturing setting. Journal of Applied Behavior Analy- news.release/pdf/osh.pdf. sis, 47, 628–632. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). (2014a). Employer- Abernathy, B. (2014). Beyond the Skinner box: The related workplace injuries and illnesses—2014. Re- design and management of organization-wide per- trieved from www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/osh.pdf. formance systems. Journal of Organizational Behavior Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). (2014b). National Management, 34(4), 235–254. census of fatal occupational injuries. Retrieved from Agnew, J., & Snyder, G. (2008). Removing obstacles to www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/cfoi.pdf. safety: A behavior-based approach. Atlanta, GA: Per- Carr, J. E., Wilder, D. A., Majdalany, L., Mathisen, D., formance Management. & Strain, L. A. (2013). An assessment-based solution Alvero, A. M., & Austin, J. (2004). The effects of ob- to a human-service employee performance problem: serving on the behavior of the observer. Journal of An initial evaluation of the Performance Diagnos- Applied Behavior Analysis, 37, 457–468. tic Checklist—Human Services. Behavior Analysis in Alvero, A. M., Bucklin, B. R., & Austin, J. (2001). An Practice, 6, 16–32. objective review of the effectiveness and essential Casella, S. E., Wilder, D. A., Neidert, P., Rey, C., Comp- characteristics of performance feedback in organi- ton, M., & Chong, I. (2010). The effects of response zational settings. Journal of Organizational Behavior effort on safe performance by therapists at an autism Management, 21(1), 3–29. treatment facility. Journal of Applied Behavior Analy- Amigo, S., Smith, A., & Ludwig, T. (2008). Using task sis, 43, 729–734. clarification, goal setting, and feedback to decrease Chhokar, J. S., & Wallin, J. A. (1984). A field study of table busing times in a franchise pizza restaurant. the effect of feedback frequency on performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, Journal of Applied Psychology, 69(3), 524–530. 28(3), 176–187. Choi, E., Johnson, D. A., Moon, K., & Oah, S. (2018). Austin, J. (2000). Performance analysis and perfor- Effects of positive and negative feedback sequence on mance diagnostics. In J. Austin & J. E. Carr (Eds.), work performance and emotional responses. Journal Handbook of applied behavior analysis (pp. 321–349). of Organizational Behavior Management, 38(2–3), Reno, NV: Context Press. 97–115. Austin, J. (2006, January–February). An introduction Cooper, M. D. (2006). Exploratory analyses of the ef- to behavior-based safety. Stone, Sand, and Gravel Re- fects of managerial support and feedback conse- view, 38–39. quences on behavioral safety maintenance. Journal Austin, J., Weatherly, N. L., & Gravina, N. E. (2005). of Organizational Behavior Management, 26(3), 1–41. Using task clarification, graphic feedback, and verbal Cooper, M. D., Phillips, R. A., Sutherland, V. J., & feedback to increase closing-task completion in a pri- Makin, P. J. (1994). Reducing accidents using vately owned restaurant. Journal of Applied Behavior goal setting and feedback: A field study. Journal Analysis, 38, 117–120. of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 67, Binder, C. (1998). The Six BoxesTM: A descendent of 219–240. Gilbert’s behavior engineering model. Retrieved Cunningham, T. R., Geller, E. S., & Clarke, S. W. from www.binder-riha.com/sixboxes.pdf. (2008). Impact of electronic prescribing in a hospital 556 S U B S P E C I A LT IE S I N A P P L IE D B E H AV I O R A N A LY S I S setting: A process-focused evaluation. International cies: Toward a synthesis of behavior analysis and cul- Journal of Medical Informatics, 77, 546–554. tural materialism. Behavior Analyst, 11(2), 161–179. Daniels, A. C., & Agnew, J. (2010). Safe by accident? Gravina, N., King, A., & Austin, J. (2019). Training Atlanta, GA: Performance Management. leaders to apply behavioral concepts to improve safe- Daniels, A. C., & Bailey, J. (2014). Performance man- ty. Safety Science, 112, 66–70. agement: Changing behavior that drives organizational Gravina, N., VanWagner, M., & Austin, J. (2008). In- effectiveness (5th ed.). Tucker, GA: Performance creasing physical therapy equipment preparation Management. using task clarification, feedback, and environmen- DePasquale, J. P., & Geller, E. S. (1999). Critical success tal manipulations. Journal of Organizational Behavior factors for behavior-based safety: A study of twenty Management, 28(2), 110–122. industry-wide applications. Journal of Safety Research, Griffin, M., Gravina, N. E., Matey, J., Pritchard, J., & 30(4), 237–249. Wine, B. (2019). Using scorecards and a lottery to Dickinson, A. M. (2001). The historical roots of orga- improve the performance of behavior technicians in nizational behavior management in the private sec- two autism treatment clinics. Journal of Organization- tor. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, al Behavior Management, 39(3–4), 280–292. 20(3), 9–58. Grindle, A. C., Dickinson, A. M., & Boettcher, W. Ditzian, K., Wilder, D. A., King, A., & Tanz, J. (2015). (2000). Behavioral safety research in manufacturing An evaluation of the Performance Diagnostic settings: A review of the literature. Journal of Organi- Checklist—Human Services to assess an employee zational Behavior Management, 20(1), 29–68. performance problem in a center-based autism treat- Haberlin, A. T., Beauchamp, K., Agnew, J., & O’Brien, ment facility. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 48, F. (2012). A comparison of pyramidal staff training 199–203. and direct staff training in community-based day Doll, J., Livesey, J., McHaffie, E., & Ludwig, T. D. (2007). programs. Journal of Organizational Behavior Manage- Keeping an uphill edge: Managing cleaning behav- ment, 32(1), 65–74. iors at a ski shop. Journal of Organizational Behavior Hagge, M., McGee, H., Matthews, G., & Aberle, S. Management, 27(3), 41–60. (2017). Behavior-based safety in a coal mine: The re- Downing, C. O., & Geller, E. S. (2012). A goal-setting lationship between observations, participation, and and feedback intervention to increase ID-checking injuries over a 14-year period. Journal of Organiza- behavior: An assessment of social validity and be- tional Behavior Management, 37, 107–118. havioral impact. Journal of Organizational Behavior Health and Safety Executive. (2012). Leadership and Management, 32(4), 297–306. worker involvement toolkit: The ABC analysis. Re- Durgin, A., Mahoney, A., Cox, C., Weetjens, B. J., & trieved from www.hse.gov.uk/construction/lwit/assets/ Poling, A. (2014). Using task clarification and feed- downloads/abc-analysis.pdf. back training to improve staff performance in an Henley, A. J., & DiGennaro Reed, F. (2015). Should you east African nongovernmental organization. Jour- order the feedback sandwich?: Efficacy of feedback nal of Organizational Behavior Management, 34(2), sequence and timing. Journal of Organizational Be- 122–143. havior Management, 35(3), 321–355. Eikenhout, N., & Austin, J. (2005). Using goals, feed- Hickman, J. S., & Geller, E. S. (2003). Self-management back, reinforcement, and a performance matrix to increase safe driving among short-haul truck driv- to improve customer service in a large department ers. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, store. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 23(4), 1–20. 24(3), 27–62. Howard, V. J., & DiGennaro Reed, F. (2015). An evalu- Fellner, D. J., & Sulzer-Azaroff, B. (1985). Occupational ation of training procedures for animal shelter volun- safety: Assessment the impact of adding assigned or teers. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, participative goal setting. Journal of Organizational 35(3), 296–320. Behavior Management, 7, 3–23. Hyten, C. (2009). Strengthening the focus on business Fox, D. K., Hopkins, B. L., & Anger, W. K. (1987). The results: The need for systems approaches in OBM. long-term effects of a token economy on safety per- Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, formance in open-pit mining. Journal of Applied Be- 29(2), 87–107. havior Analysis, 20, 215–224. Jessup, P. A., & Stahelski, A. J. (1999). The effects of Geller, E. S. (1996). Working safe: How to help people ac- a combined goal setting, feedback, and incentive tively care for health and safety. Boca Raton, FL: CRC intervention on job performance in a manufactur- Press. ing environment. Journal of Organizational Behavior Geller, E. S. (2002). The participation factor: How to Management, 19(3), 5–26. increase involvement in occupational safety. Chicago: Johnson, D. A., Casella, S. E., McGee, H., & Lee, S. ASSE. C. (2014). The use and validation of preintervention Gilbert, T. F. (1996). Human competence: Engineering diagnostic tools in organizational behavior manage- worthy performance. Amherst, MA: HRD Press. ment. Journal of Organizational Behavior Manage- Glenn, S. S. (1988). Contingencies and metacontingen- ment, 34(2), 104–121.  Organizational Behavior Management 557 Johnson, R. P., & Frederiksen, L. W. (1984). Process vs. F. Maley (Eds.), Behavior analysis and systems analy- outcome feedback and goal setting in a human ser- sis: An integrative approach to mental health programs vice organization. Journal of Organizational Behavior (pp. 318–343). Kalamazoo, MI: Behaviordelia. Management, 5(3–4), 37–56. Martinez-Onstott, B., Wilder, D., & Sigurdsson, S. Kelley, D. P., & Gravina, N. (2018). Every minute (2016). Identifying the variables contributing to at- counts: Using process improvement and performance risk performance: Initial evaluation of the Perfor- feedback to improve patient flow in an emergency mance Diagnostic Checklist—Safety (PDC-Safety). department. Journal of Organizational Behavior Man- Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, agement, 38, 234–243. 36(1), 80–93. Komaki, J., Barwick, K. D., & Scott, L. R. (1978). A McSween, T. E. (1995). The values-based safety process: behavioral approach to occupational safety: Pin- Improving your safety culture with a behavioral ap- pointing and reinforcing safe performance in a food proach. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold. manufacturing plant. Journal of Applied Psychology, McSween, T. E. (2003). The values-based safety process: 63, 424–445. Improving your safety culture with behavior-based safety Krause, T. R. (1995). Employee-driven systems for safe be- (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. havior: Integrating behavioral and statistical methodolo- Nordstrom, R., Lorenzi, P., & Hall, R. V. (1991). A be- gies. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold. havioral training program for managers in city gov- Krause, T. R. (1997). The behavior-based safety process: ernment. Journal of Organizational Behavior Manage- Managing involvement for an injury-free culture. New ment, 11(2), 189–212. York: Van Nostrand Reinhold. Oah, S., & Lee, J. (2011). Effects of hourly, low-in- Krause, T. R., Seymour, K. J., & Sloat, K. C. M. (1999). centive, and high-incentive pay on simulated work Long-term evaluation of a behavior-based method for productivity: Initial findings with a new laboratory improving safety performance: A meta-analysis of 73 method. Journal of Organizational Behavior Manage- interrupted time-series replications. Safety Science, ment, 31(1), 21–42. 32, 1–18. O’Brien, R. M., Dickinson, A. M., & Rosow, R. P. (Eds.). LaFleur, T., & Hyten, C. (1995). Improving the quality (1982). Industrial behavior modification. New York: of hotel banquet staff performance. Journal of Organi- Pergamon Press. zational Behavior Management, 15(1–2), 69–93. Occupational Health and Safety Administration. (2000, Loewy, S., & Bailey, J. (2007). The effects of graphic reprinted). Process safety management. Retrieved feedback, goal setting, and manager praise on cus- from www.osha.gov/Publications/osha3132.html. tomer service behaviors. Journal of Organizational Olson, R., & Austin, J. (2001). Behavior-based safety Behavior Management, 27(3), 15–26. and working alone: The effects of a self-monitoring Long, R. D., Wilder, D. A., Betz, A., & Dutta, A. (2012). package on the safe performance of bus operators. Effects of and preference for pay for performance: An Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, analogue analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analy- 21(3), 5–43. sis, 45, 821–826. Palmer, M. G., & Johnson, M. (2013). The effects of task Loughrey, T., Marshall, G., Bellizzi, A., & Wilder, D. A. clarification and group graphic feedback on early (2013). The use of video modeling, prompting, and punch-in times. Journal of Organizational Behavior feedback to increase credit card promotion in a retail Management, 33(4), 265–275. setting. Journal of Organizational Behavior Manage- Pampino, R. N., Heering, P. W., Wilder, D. A., Barton, ment, 33(3), 200–208. C. G., & Burson, L. M. (2004). The use of the Per- Ludwig, T. D., Biggs, J., Wagner, S., & Geller, E. S. formance Diagnostic Checklist to guide interven- (2002). Using public feedback and competitive re- tion selection in an independently owned coffee wards to increase the safe driving of pizza deliver- shop. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, ers. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 23(2), 5–19. 21(4), 75–104. Pampino, R. N., MacDonald, J. E., Mullin, J. E., & Ludwig, T. D., & Geller, E. S. (1997). Assigned versus Wilder, D. A. (2004). Weekly feedback versus daily participatory goal setting and response generaliza- feedback: An application in retail. Journal of Organi- tion: Managing injury control among professional zational Behavior Management, 23(2), 21–43. pizza deliverers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(2), Pampino, R. N., Wilder, D. A., & Binder, C. (2005). The 253–261. use of functional assessment and frequency building Ludwig, T. D., Gray, T. W., & Rowell, A. (1998). In- procedures to increase product knowledge and data creasing recycling in academic buildings: A system- entry skills among foreman in a construction orga- atic replication. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, nization. Journal of Organizational Behavior Manage- 31, 683–686. ment, 25(2), 1–36. Malott, M. E. (2003). Paradox of organizational change. Redmon, B. (1991). Pinpointing the technological fault Reno, NV: Context Press. in applied behavior analysis. Journal of Applied Be- Malott, R. W. (1974). A behavioral systems approach to havior Analysis, 24(3), 441–444. the design of human services. In D. Harshbarger & R. Rice, A., Austin, J., & Gravina, N. (2009). Increasing 558 S U B S P E C I A LT IE S I N A P P L IE D B E H AV I O R A N A LY S I S customer service behaviors using manager-delivered als with intellectual disabilities. Behavior Analysis in task clarification and social praise. Journal of Applied Practice, 11(2), 148–153. Behavior Analysis, 42, 665–669. So, Y., Lee, K., & Oah, S. (2013). Relative effects of daily Rodriguez, M., Wilder, D. A., Therrien, K., Wine, B., feedback and weekly feedback on customer service Miranti, R., Daratany, K., et al. (2006). Use of the behavior at a gas station. Journal of Organizational Performance Diagnostic Checklist to select an inter- Behavior Management, 33(2), 137–151. vention designed to increase the offering of promo- Sulzer-Azaroff, B. (1980). Behavioral ecology and ac- tional stamps at two sites of a restaurant franchise. cident prevention. Journal of Organizational Behavior Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, Management, 2(1), 11–44. 25(3), 17–35. Sulzer-Azaroff, B., & Austin, J. (2000). Does BBS work?: Rohn, D., Austin, J., & Lutrey, S. M. (2003). Using feed- Behavior-based safety and injury reduction: A survey back and performance accountability to decrease of the evidence. Professional Safety, 45(7), 19–24. cash register shortages. Journal of Organizational Be- Thurkow, N. M., Bailey, J. S., & Stamper, M. R. (2000). havior Management, 22(1), 33–46. The effects of group and individual monetary incen- Rummler, G. A., & Brache, A. P. (2012). Improving per- tives on productivity of telephone interviewers. Jour- formance: How to manage the white space in the orga- nal of Organizational Behavior Management, 20(2), nizational chart (3rd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 3–25. Sasson, J. R., Alvero, A. M., & Austin, J. (2006). Effects Tuncel, S., Lotlikar, H., Salem, S., & Daraiseh, N. of process and human performance improvement (2006). Effectiveness of behaviour based safety in- strategies. Journal of Organizational Behavior Manage- terventions to reduce accidents and injuries in work- ment, 26(3), 43–78. places: Critical appraisal and meta-analysis. Theoreti- Sasson, J. R., & Austin, J. (2003). Performer-level sys- cal Issues in Ergonomics Science, 7(3), 191–209. tems analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior Vergason, C. M., & Gravina, N. E. (2020). Using a Management, 22(4), 27–58. guest- and confederate-delivered token economy to Sasson, J. R., & Austin, J. (2005). The effects of train- increase employee–guest interactions at a zoo. Jour- ing, feedback, and participant involvement in behav- nal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 53(1), 422–430. ioral safety observations on office ergonomic behav- Wilder, D. A., Austin, J., & Casella, S. (2009). Applying ior. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, behavior analysis in organizations: Organizational 24(4), 1–30. behavior management. Psychological Services, 6(3), Sigurdsson, S. O., & Austin, J. (2006). Institutionaliza- 202–211. tion and response maintenance in organizational Wilder, D., & Sigurdsson, S. (2015). Applications of behavior management. Journal of Organizational Be- behavior analysis to improve safety in organizations havior Management, 26(4), 41–77. and community settings. In H. S. Roane, J. E. Ring- Slowiak, J. M., Dickinson, A. M., & Huitema, B. E. dahl, & T. S. Falcomata (Eds.), Clinical and organiza- (2011). Self-solicited feedback: Effects of hourly pay tional applications of behavior analysis (pp. 583–604). and individual monetary incentive pay. Journal of Or- San Diego, CA: Academic Press/Elsevier. ganizational Behavior Management, 31(1), 3–20. Zohar, D., & Luria, G. (2003). The use of supervisory Smith, M., & Wilder, D. A. (2018). The use of the Per- practices as leverage to improve safety behavior: A formance Diagnostic Checklist—Human Services to cross level intervention model. Journal of Safety Re- assess and improve the job performance of individu- search, 34(5), 567–577.