Luthans, F., & Kreitner, R. (1973). The role of punishment in organizational behavior modification (OB MOD). Public Personnel Management, 2(3), 156-161.
This is a good example of a bad paper - little science and a lot of supposition.
Summary
Punishment is an aversive stimulus meant to reduce the frequency of a specific past behavior. When an employee performs an undesirable action, punishment should be applied quickly enough so that the employee sees a cause and effect relationship between their action and their punishment. This negative association between behavior and punishment, and the desire to avoid the punishment, will result in a learned behavior - not doing the undesirable thing. There are several arguments against the use of punishment: it causes anxiety, it deals with undesirable actions but not the desires that precede them,the effectiveness of the punishment wanes in effectiveness, and “the punisher may never be perceived in a favorable light again - even in nonpunishing situations.” Employees need to understand the specific action for which they’re being punished. After a punishment, the desired alternative action should be presented and reinforced, and undesirable action should cease.
Application
Punishment is tricky. Though it can be effective (see Baumeister 2001), I would not recommend using it as a Plan A. It can backfire quite easily and irreparably damage the manager-employee relationship. One good principle from this paper (though it really cites very little scientific evidence) is that reinforcement (feedback) is most effective when it is immediate.
Comments powered by Disqus.