[From Fred Nickols (980920.1000)]
Rick Marken (980919.1310)]
Bruce Abbott (980919.1445 EST)--
Wouldn't that depend on the system? For example, if the
pleasure derived from having one's work genuinely praised can
only be maintained by new expressions of praise for new work
accomplished, then to maintain a level of pleasure close to
reference, the person would have to keep repeating the
sorts of work performances that win genuine praise; the level
of work in that case would not decline and eventually cease;
rather it would continue and perhaps even increase (if the
current level of pleasure experienced is below reference).Sure. I imagine that you could design a system that works this
way. The situation is actually equvalent the one described by
your control of behavior model. In this case, the controller
controls for work by giving praise at a rate that keeps work at
the controller's reference; the controllee controls for praise
by doing work at a rate that keeps praise at the controllee's
reference. Of course, this kind of control only works as long
as the controllee is controlling for praise and the controller
is (or can arrange to be) the only source of praise.
Hmm. If we substitute pay for praise (or add it to praise), if
we substitute "manager" for "controller" and if we substitute
"employee" for "controllee" in Rick's response above, do we not
have a view of the workplace that is consistent with PCT and, at
the same time, is consistent with commonplace managerial practices
as well as the behaviorist perspective?
Regards,
Fred Nickols
Distance Consulting
http://home.att.net/~nickols/distance.htm
nickols@worldnet.att.net