A wide variety of incentives are being employed in the financial services industry. An examination of these practices in light of reinforcement theory suggests that while encouraging higher levels of performance, these incentives fail to sustain the high levels of desired performance. A computerized video is discussed as one means of integrating theory and practice, which should yield high levels of sustained performance from the sales force.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AYLLON, T., & AZRIN, N.The token economy: A motivational system for therapy and rehabilitation. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1968.
2.
AYLLON, T., & KOLKO, D.Productivity and schedules of reinforcement in Business and industry. In R. M. O'Brien, A. M. Dickenson, and M. P. Rosow (Eds.), Industrial behavior modification. Elmsford, New York: Pergamon Press, 1982, pp. 35-40.
3.
BANDURA, A.Principles of behavior modification. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1969.
4.
BEALTY, R. W., & SCHNEIR, C. E.A case for positive reinforcement. Business Horizons, April 1975, 57-66.
5.
BURGER, C. J., CUMMINGS, L. L., & HENEMAN, H. G., III. Expectancy theory and operant conditioning predictions of performance under variable ratio and continuous schedules of reinforcement. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1975, 14, 227-243.
6.
BUSHARDT, S. C., & FOWLER, A.Improving teaching effectiveness: Merit pay vs. organizational culture. Capstone Journal of Education, 1988, 7, 28-38.
7.
FERSTER, C. B., & SKINNER, B. F.Schedules of reinforcement. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1957.
8.
GRIFFEN, R. W.Management. Boston, Massachusetts: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1984.
9.
HAMNER, W. C.Reinforcement theory and contingency management in organizational setting. In H. L. Tosi and W. C. Hamner (Ed.), Organizational management: A contingency approach. Chicago: St. Clari Press, 1974.
10.
HAMNER, W. C., & HAMNER, E. P.Behavior modification on the bottom line. Organizational Dynamics, Spring 1986, 3-21.
11.
JABLONSKY, S. F., DeVRIES, R.Operant conditioning principles extrapolated to the theory of management. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1972, 1, 340-358.
LUTHANS, F., & KREITNER, R.The impact of contingent reinforcement on retail salesperson's performance behavior: A replicated field experiment. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, Spring/Summer 1985, 7(1,2), 25-35.
14.
LUTHANS, F., PAUL, R. & BAKER, D.An experimental analysis of the impact of contingent reinforcement on salespersons performance behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1981, 66, 314-323.
15.
MAWHINNEY, T. C., & MAWHINNEY, R.Operant terms and concepts applied to industry. In R. M. O'Brien, A. M. Dickenson, and M. P. Rosow (Eds.), Undustrial Behavior modification. Elmsford, New York: Pergamon Press, 1982. pp. 115-134.
16.
NORD, W.Beyond the teaching machine: The neglected area of operant conditioning in theory and practice of management. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1969, 4, 375-407.
17.
ORGAN, D. W., & HAMNER, W. C.Organizational behavior: An applied psychological approach. Dallas, Texas: Business Publications, 1982.
18.
PRITCHARD, R., HOLLENBACK, J., & DELEO, P.The effects of continuous and partial schedules of reinforcement on effort, performance and satisfaction. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1980, 25, 336-353.
19.
PRITCHARD, R., HOLLENBACK, J., VON BERGER, C., & KIRK, R.The effects of varying schedules of reinforcement of human task performance. Organizational Behavioral and Human Performance, 1976, 16, 205-230.
20.
REPPUCCI, N., SAUNDERS, T. T.Social psychology of behavior modification: Problems of implementation in natural settings. American Psychologist, 1974, 29, 649-660.
21.
SKINNER, B. F.The behavior of organisms: An experimental approach. New York: Appleton Century Crofts, 1938.
22.
SKINNER, B. F.Science and human behavior. New York: The Free Press, 1953.
23.
SKINNER, B. F.Contingencies of reinforcement: A theoretical analysis. New York: Appleton-Century Crofts, 1969.
24.
WARREN, M. W.Using behavioral technology to improve sales performance. Training and Development Journal, July 1978, 54-56.
25.
YUKL, G. A., LUTHANS, G. P.Consequences of reinforcement schedules and incentive magnitudes for employee performance: Problems encountered in an industrial setting. Journal of Applied psychology, 1975, 60, 294-298.
26.
YUKL, G., WEXLEY, K, N., & SEYMORE, J. E.Effectiveness of pay incentives under variable ratio and continuous reinforcement schedules. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1972, 56, 19-23.
27.
YUKL, G. A., LUTHANS, G. P., & PURSELL, E. D.The effectiveness of performance incentives under continuous and variable ratio schedules of reinforcement. Personnel Psychology, 1976, 29, 221-231.
