|
| Improving Performance: What to Do and What Not to Do |
| Sunday, May 30, 2010 |
| 3:00 PM–4:20 PM |
| Republic A (Grand Hyatt) |
| Area: OBM |
| Chair: Amanda S. Mentzer (Queens College, The City University of New York) |
| |
| Effects of Self-Monitoring Plus Feedback on the Customer-Service Performance of Registration Employees |
| Domain: Applied Behavior Analysis |
| AMANDA S. MENTZER (The Graduate Center, Queens College, City University of New York), Alicia M. Alvero (Queens College, The City University of New York) |
| |
| Abstract: The present study evaluated the effects of self-monitoring plus feedback on the customer-service performance of six registration employees at a continuing education program. Customer-service performance included an introduction, a solution, a suggestion, information confirmation, solution confirmation, and a close. The primary investigator used a multiple baseline experimental design across two groups of three responses. During baseline, the primary investigator and the manager provided employees with reference materials that indicated the standard operating procedure for answering an incoming telephone call. During self-monitoring and feedback, the primary investigator or the manager provided employees with self-monitoring sheets and feedback. Self-monitoring plus feedback was an effective treatment package to increase the percent of correct customer service for two responses, the introduction and the close. Small increases in performance were noted for information confirmation and solution confirmation. Future research should investigate what antecedent, when combined with feedback, results in the greatest improvement in performance. |
| |
| CANCELLED The Effects of Immediate Feedback on Productivity and Persistence of Goal-Directed Behaviour |
| Domain: Experimental Analysis |
| TRIONA TAMMEMAGI (National University of Ireland, Galway), Denis P. O'Hora (National University of Ireland, Galway), Kristen A. Maglieri (Trinity College Dublin) |
| |
| Abstract: Prolonged exposure to unattainable goals results in a deterioration of goal-directed behaviour. The current study examined whether immediate performance feedback attenuates this effect. One group of 30 participants worked on a computer-based data-entry task and received immediate performance feedback throughout the experiment. A second group of 30 participants worked on the same task without feedback. A counterbalanced ABACX reversal design was employed, consisting of an initial baseline condition, a first goal condition (either high, unattainable goal or low attainable goal), a return to baseline conditions and then a second goal condition (the alternate goal to the first goal condition). Each condition contained three four-minute sessions. In a final fifth condition each participant chose a manager from either the high or low goal condition. Productivity (the average performance per session) and persistence (change in performance across sessions) constituted the dependent variables. Findings will be discussed in light of recent behavioural accounts of goal setting. |
| |
| Three Empirical Examinations of Employee of the Month |
| Domain: Applied Behavior Analysis |
| DOUGLAS A. JOHNSON (Operant-Tech Consulting), Markus Arnold (University of Hamburg), Eva Ponick (Clausthal University of Technology), Heike Schenk-Mathes (Clausthal University of Technology) |
| |
| Abstract: Despite the widespread use of employee of the month programs, there have been virtually no empirical investigations into this topic. This presentation will detail three recent laboratory experiments designed to examine the effect of an incentive similar to employee of the month. The first experiment assessed the impact of receiving an incentive where they were simply told that they the top performer. In the second experiment, the incentive was enhanced to include a $50 bonus for the winner. In this study, the existence of other team members was fabricated. Participants always placed between 2nd and 5th place in order to assess the impact of being an unrewarded runner-up. The third experiment had the top contributor of a team win an incentive that consisted of seeing one’s photo displayed, receiving monetary incentives, or a combination of both. Overall, results suggest that employee of the month programs do not sustain improved performance and may even have detrimental effects. |
| |
|
| |