Many behavioral teachings would tell you that positive reinforcement should be given regularly. A "nice job" accompanied by a pat on the back is supposed to do wonders for an employee's performance. However even the best behavioral scientists recognize that this will work for some people but not others. The problem here is that there is never an alternate suggestion on exactly HOW to alter the method of reinforcement outside of telling you that it must be different at times.

Much has been written about reinforcement and consequences, but it still does not seem to be an exact science by most accounts, regardless of how much someone thinks they have perfected the method. The recognition that different methods of reinforcement are needed touches on how different we are as individual human beings (I believe this also separates us from the animals), but only further confuses the behavioral approach to management as a scientific formula. The combination of possible reinforcers is virtually infinite, and the number of possible responses to those reinforcers is also virtually infinite. Therefore, it would be virtually impossible to come up with a scientific method for using the right reinforcers to produce the desired effect every time.

Even though this topic should (and likely will) take SEVERAL other posts in order to completely nail down the proper approach for effective use of reinforcement and consequences, I want to attempt to start this though by looking at one of the parables of Jesus. In the Parable of the Talents, I think that we find some important clues to reinforcement and encouraging the behavior that you want. First let's lay the groundwork...

The boss gives each person some money (commensurate with their ability), and takes off. When he returns, he sees and talks to each one about what they have done with it while he was gone. The first two have invested it and worked that investment providing a return (or profit) to the boss. This shows a desired level of productivity. The third buries it, and returns the exact amount back to the boss. He thinks that he did a good thing, but ultimately gained nothing for the boss. This marks a less than desirable level of productivity. Now let's see how the boss responded...

To the productive guys (verses 21 and 23)
His master said to him, Well done, good and faithful servant.You have been faithful over a little; I will set you over much. Enter into the joy of your master.

To the unproductive guy (verses 26-30)
But his master answered him, You wicked and slothful servant! You knew that I reap where I have not sown and gather where I scattered no seed? 27 Then you ought to have invested my money with the bankers, and at my coming I should have received what was my own with interest. 28 So take the talent from him and give it to him who has the ten talents. 29 For to everyone who has will more be given, and he will have an abundance. But from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away. 30 And cast the worthless servant into the outer darkness. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

1. Immediate - When the boss returned and was informed of how the men did, his response was not delayed. Feedback does not necessarily need to happen as soon as the behavior happened, but should be immediate upon notification of the behavior or results.
   
2. Reinforcing of the Behavior - In both cases he referred to his servants positively or negatively. In fact (to reinforce the immediacy) his initial response was either positive or negative. There was no beating around the bush, so the servants knew right away where they stood, whether they did good or bad.
   
3. Personal - The response was also personal. The boss here mentions personal traits about the servants that help them to understand how they fit into the organization. I know it would be a stretch today to refer to even a non-productive employee as a "wicked and slothful servant, " but look especially on the positive side of this. Do you think that the "good and faithful servant" walks away from this interaction feeling like a valued part of the organization? I would think that this would really help the employee connect their work to personal goals and objectives that they have, and touches what drives them.
   
4. Specific - In each case, the boss explained to them exactly what it was that they did. that pleased or dis-pleased him.
   
5. Consequential - Whether positive or negative, the boss was also very clear about what the reward or the punishment was going to be for the behavior. The productive employees "earned" more responsibility. Interestingly enough, not more recognition or money, but more opportunities to prove themselves again. In the case of the unproductive employee, I know that it would be difficult today to cast them into "outer darkness," but rewards are rewards and punishments are punishments. At minimum, notice that the employee lost the responsibility, and was not given more. In today's world, the "outer darkness" may mean going back to square one, and having to earn the responsibility again. Whatever it looks like, poor performance must carry with it certain consequences, and we (as managers and leaders) must have the courage to deliver them when appropriate.
   
6. Relational - Especially on the positive side of this we see that the productive employees get to "enter into the joy of the master". To me this looks like an opportunity to celebrate a bit, and connect with the boss. In previous posts I've mentioned the importance of being relational with our employees, and I think that this shows an example of that happening.

All of this put together results in a nice little acronym that I call "IRPSCR" Principle... Well, I know that this doesn't come out nice and clean, but I believe that these are some of the key factors of reinforcement and consequence from the Bible. It keeps personal responsibility in check, and never leaves room for doubt on where someone stands. Granted in our jobs today, the actions do not have to be as extreme as in the example used from the Scriptures, but the principle is solid. So I guess my challenge you you today is to look at the IRPSCR Principle, and figure out how you can scale it down to a less extreme example in your job today.