Contrary to popular opinion, the definition of behavior goes beyond visually observable actions. Research has demonstrated that internal or covert behavior operates by the same principles and can be modified by the same techniques as external or overt behaviors. Sharon Bower's definition of behavior is one that is easy to understand and remember. AMPS stands for the four different modes of responding.
Actions are movements you can observe in others and yourself. These include body movements, posture, gestures, and facial expressions.
Mental pictures are fantasies or images in the imagination. Physical sensations are bodily sensations-such as pain, tightness, tingling, and heat-that signal how we feel. Sentences are things we say aloud (overt) or silently (covert).
Although actions and spoken sentences are the only behaviors we can actually observe in others, we often make guesses about others' internal behaviors by observing how people act and by listening to what they say. We can, however, directly observe internal behaviors in ourselves, and when it is appropriate we can ask employees to observe their internal behaviors. For example, a salesperson might avoid the action of calling a particular client on the phone because of the physical sensation of tightness in the throat (one of a class of behaviors commonly called anxiety). Or a management trainee may sulk in a planning meeting in response to negative thoughts or silent sentences (one of a class of behaviors commonly called self-consciousness or lack of confidence). Generally, however, most behavior change programs in organizations are aimed directly at observable behavior such as actions or speech.
The four parts of behavior are dynamic-that is, if you change one, then the others usually change as well. Norman Vincent Peale, among others, attests to the power of positive thought on actions. Likewise, a subordinate who learns to feel relaxed (P) in an evaluative situation will generally have a better self-image (M), make more positive self-statements (S), and perform more effectively (A). A behavior change program may target any one of these behaviors for intervention in order to change any or all of the others.
AMPS, however, is only the beginning of a definition of behavior, because it merely explains the types of behavior. In our daily lives we use numerous abstract words-such as immature, hostile, capable, feminine, independent, motivated-to stand for classes of behavior. Words of this kind do not work in a behavior change program. Consider the following example from one of my workshops: Georgia says, "Otto is an older salesman with a lot of experience. The problem is that he is continually challenging my authority." This sounds pretty bad, but do we really know what the problem behavior is? What is meant by "challenging my authority"? What does Otto actually do? Is it Otto’s expression or something he says? Or does Otto go over Georgia's head with requests and complaints? This description doesn't tell us.
Thus, the first task is to translate abstract and vague descriptions into words that stand for specific observable behaviors. In general you can ask, "Is there a distinct beginning and end to the behavior-that is, can it be counted?" ("Count-ability" and accountability are essential components of a behavior change program.) "What must the person do in order for me to say that the behavior has occurred?" And finally, "Can it be reliably observed (including self-observation)-that is, can it be heard, or seen, or felt, or smelled?" When you can answer all of these questions either affirmatively or in terms of very specific occurrences, then you will have identified a behavioral event.
But the task is not yet complete. Going back to the problem with Otto, we see that Georgia's description implies that Otto's undesirable behavior exists independently of the environmental setting. It does not specify the situation in which the behavior that challenges authority actually occurs. When does Otto challenge Georgia's authority? To complete the description of the problem it is necessary to think of the behavior in combination with the situation in which it occurs (behavior-in-situation)? Let's look at an improved description of the problem with Otto: "During the weekly staff meeting, Otto-an older, experienced salesman on my staff-frequently makes negative (uncooperative, disapproving, defeatist) comments about my program." Here we have:
Behavior: Making negative comments about program in
Situation: Staff meeting
Is "making negative comments about program" a behavior? Let's ask the questions: Can the comments be counted? Yes, a comment has a beginning and an end. What must Otto do before I can say that a negative comment about my program has occurred? He must make a statement that is negative-connoting disapproval, predicting failure, or advocating noncooperation. In a controlled laboratory experiment, the operational definition of negative comments about a program would be far more precise, and only specified kinds of statements would be permitted to count. As a practicing manager you don't need to go to that length, but you do need to be able to deter mine whether or not each of Otto's comments is negative about the program. The answer to the final question is helpful here: Can a negative comment about the program be reliably observed? Yes, two or more people listening to Otto could probably agree whether one of his specific comments about the program was negative. We can now say that the problem has been specified-Otto's negative comments about the program in the weekly staff meeting.
Once you have identified the behavior-in-situation, you are con fronted with the question: Is this behavior performance-related? If the behavior has no impact on the accomplishment of organizational objectives, then using company time to change it would be inefficient and wasteful. Thus, it is important to be sure that the behavior is related to the employee's own performance outcomes or to the performance of other employees to such an extent that it influences accomplishment of company objectives. If Otto's sales performance under the new program is exceptional and his negative comments do not appear to influence the sales performance of others, then Otto's behavior is probably not performance-related. On the other hand, if Georgia responds to Otto's negative comments with "self-doubts" (silent sentences) and these self-doubts result in her making defensive remarks to Otto (spoken sentences), then Otto's behavior is performance-related in that it has an adverse effect on Georgia's performance.
Under these circumstances it would be an appropriate target behavior to consider for a behavior change program. (Of course, Georgia might also consider a self-change program in which she alters her self-doubting silent sentences and defensive remarks to Otto in the staff meeting.)
Identifying the target behavior is not always as easy and as obvious as it is in the case of Otto. Suppose a supervisor says, "Meredith is too aggressive." You already know this description is inadequate because it tells you nothing of the circumstances in which Meredith is aggressive or even what is meant by "aggressive." Suppose that in trying to clarify these points the supervisor says, "I don't know what situations she's aggressive in-she's always aggressive!" The way to solve this is to think of specific examples and to observe. For example, the super visor says, "Today, when another secretary asked her to copy a flier she said 'no' loudly and stomped out the door." And the next day the supervisor observes Meredith reply sharply, "Get it yourself!" when a file clerk asks her to pick up an extra cup of coffee at the canteen. By looking for and collecting examples, you can quickly identify specific behaviors in specific situations; When asked to do a favor, Meredith tends to refuse in an ungracious manner. Write down several examples of the target behavior. Describe fully the situations and analyze what they have in common. When the behavior occurs in many situations, it may be that the situations have something in common, such as Meredith's rudeness when she is asked to do a favor. If you cannot identify a common thread, you probably have several different problem behaviors.
Often the problem is that someone is not doing something. For example, a manager might say, "Jack doesn't approach and greet customers." Here again, begin by observing and writing down examples of behavior-in-situations-only this time specify the situations in which you want the behavior to occur. Jack is doing something else when the manager wants him to approach and greet customers-that is, Jack is actively performing a behavior incompatible with approaching and greeting customers, such as talking to another sales clerk. To have a complete description of the problem, it is necessary to specify the situation and what desirable behavior is not occurring as well as what undesirable behavior is occurring. Jack's supervisor should specify the situation in which he wants the behavior to occur-when a customer enters the store-and then observe what happens instead of the desired behavior.
Another problem difficult to identify is an absent or inadequate outcome, such as an uncompleted report or unfilled sales quota. An outcome is not a behavior, but it is dependent on the performance of a chain of behaviors. Therefore, problem identification requires you to pinpoint the chain of behaviors necessary to produce the desired outcome. The location of the problem is the point in the chain at which the worker is not performing the behavior necessary to move to the next link.
When you know the chain of behaviors necessary to produce the desired outcome, problem identification is simplified: You need merely observe the person carefully step by step through the task until you identify the breakdown. But managers often supervise people whose work is outside their expertise. This is particularly true in professional and technical areas. In these situations you can ask the subordinate, observe a model, or seek expert advice.
Ask the subordinate: It is usually a good idea to begin with the assumption that employees know what steps are necessary to complete their assigned tasks and that they are aware of the obstacles they are experiencing. (After all, they were employed because they had the requisite skills and experience.) Subordinates may feel hesitant to express the difficulty, but by using the information-gathering techniques, you can help them talk about the problem. This sets the stage for enlisting their cooperation in correcting the outcome problem, but more importantly, it is a good opportunity for you to help your subordinates assume responsibility for their own work behavior. Rather than changing the behavior of the subordinates, you can use this as an opportunity to teach them to change their own behavior.
Consider Charles, the program director in a radio station. His problem is simple-he procrastinates. It takes him twice as long as necessary to finish the schedule of upcoming programs, and this creates problems for all the other departments as well. (For example, sales can't sell programs, because they don't know what's going on the air or when.) Completing a schedule or a report is not a behavior; it is an outcome of a chain of behaviors. Thus, to say that Charles procrastinates does not focus on the problem behavior that results in delayed schedules.
During the coaching session, the station manager asked Charles about each step necessary for completing the program. Charles said, "It's not that I put off the scheduling per se. It's that I have trouble with Rosemary. I need to get a projection of the topics of her editorials, but I have so much trouble asking her for them that I find myself sending memos. She doesn't respond right away, and this causes a delay." Further investigation revealed that Charles found it very difficult to give Rosemary a directive, because she would question his directives. Consequently, he would respond by sending the directive in memo form. Thus, the behavior-in-situation turned out to be not Charles's procrastination but giving Rosemary a directive (behavior) when she asked questions (situation).
Observe a model: When the target person cannot identify the break down in the chain of behaviors and you do not have sufficient expertise to identify the behavior links necessary to produce the outcome, then you can observe a model. This involves identifying another per son whose performance leads to a successful outcome and observing the step-by-step behaviors in which the model engages to produce a quality outcome. Then observe the target person and, using the mod el's chain of behaviors as a criterion, look for a breakdown. For example, if a couple of your salespeople are not reaching their quotas, you might go out into the field with your top performers to observe their sales presentations. Then you could observe the less skilled sales people in action while looking for the behaviors present in the stars’ performance but absent in the less successful presentations. The discrepancy would illuminate the missing links in the behavior chain.
Seek expert advice: When it isn't possible to actually observe a model, consult with a model. In this case, the model is the expert who knows how to perform each behavior necessary for a successful outcome, After the expert delineates the necessary chain of behaviors, observe the target person's behavior, looking for the broken link. Returning to the sales example, you might ask a consultant who has expertise in selling to describe the critical selling steps and their order. You would then observe and compare the below quota salespeople's presentations to the sales expert's description.
After the target behavior has been broken down into discrete behavioral events, a functional analysis must be made to determine the ABCs-to observe the target behavior in order to discover the antecedent cues that evoke the behavior and the consequences that maintain it. This relationship gives you a schema of how the behavior functions and of how to determine which points of intervention offer the best potential results.
