The Journey
Approaching my 42nd year of practice as a Behavior Analyst gives me pause to reflect on my career path. In graduate school at the University of Florida, I managed the Precision Teaching Laboratory and taught Applied Behavior Analysis to undergraduate students. At that point in time microcomputers were just starting to enter the market. Coincidentally, in my office there happened to be an IBM 5120 that was configured to run the computer language called APL. I became very interested in APL and wrote software to run the Precision Teaching Laboratory. APL is not used much these days, but it was a very sophisticated language that used matrices as the core building block.
After graduating from the University of Florida in 1984, I worked as a behavior analyst in a regional institutional settings for persons with disabilities. While that work was good, I wanted to practice Applied Behavior Analysis in the business setting, an area that we now know as Organizational Behavior Management (OBM). Given that OBM was a new area of practice it was difficult to find a job in this area - and frankly, still seems to be the case. However, my wife's parents owned a camera store - Sarasota Camera Exchange - and they invited me and my wife to move to Sarasota to join the family business. My role was to open a one hour photo lab in the camera store. Over the next 13 years the film and digital Imaging Center grew to become the most advanced camera store photo lab in the world, offering an unparalleled range of imaging services.
The Imaging Center, as we called it, was a crucible of creativity (and OBM opportunity.) We offered an enormous range of conventional photographic processes. As early adopters of digital imaging, we restored heirloom photographs, designed and produced trade show displays, slide shows, etc. Nowadays, creating a Powerpoint presentation is no big deal. But in the early 1990's, presentation slides were created by sending digital files to our film recorder which created film-based slides with the digital image. Of course, the slide film was then processed in our film processor and each slide was mounted using what always seemed as an exceedingly complicated machine for the purpose.
Sarasota Camera Exchange was well known in the photo industry. We worked closely with executives from major manufacturers, e.g., Kodak, Fuji, Nikon, Canon, Minolta, Ricoh, to share our experiences as a "boots on the ground" company. Executives from these companies were not familiar with OBM, but open to it. On occasion I did have opportunities to share some OBM ideas, but I would be remiss if I did not also mention that each of these executives were highly intelligent and very sophisticated in their thinking about business, and I learned so much from them about business management, ideas that collaborated well with the OBM perspective.
In 1997 the photo industry was experiencing a great consolidation with Wolf Camera and Ritz Camera (by the way, the owners are cousins) buying up independent camera stores. Wolf Camera gave us the proverbial offer we couldn't refuse and so Sarasota Camera became one of 600 stores owned by Wolf Camera. I stayed on to become a District Manager, responsible for fifteen stores. A few years later, Wolf Camera sold to Ritz Camera and I then had an opportunity to learn another style of multi-store management. The retail store environment taught me much about (organizational) management systems, e.g., profit & loss statements, key performance indicators, process management, quality control, marketing, training, etc. However, each of those systems also connected to behavior - of employees, customers, camera manufacturers, etc., providing excellent opportunities to practice Organizational Behavior Management.
At that time, drugstores were promoting their one hour labs, increasing the competitive environment. What was needed was some good old fashioned "stimulus control." I phoned David Ritz (owner of Ritz Camera) and suggested that we create a "discriminative stimulus" for photo processing done at Ritz Camera, one that was not available (S-Delta) at drugstores. I called this (verbal) stimulus, "Camera Store Processing" and this was simplified as CSQ. Ritz fully embraced the idea and it became the cornerstone of Ritz's marketing campaign, with CSQ proudly emblazoned on every film processing envelope, advertisement, etc. It is difficult to estimate the number of instances of CSQ across various marketing campaigns, but most certainly that number is very large.
In 2006, as the exponential growth of digital cameras continued to erode Ritz Camera's "cash cow" of film and print processing revenue, I could clearly see the proverbial writing on the wall that the photo business was going to fail, urging me to consider another turn in my career path. I then returned to the direct practice of Applied Behavior Analysis as a private practitioner. Unfortunately, for Ritz Camera, my prediction did come true. A few years later, Ritz Camera declared bankruptcy and with it, a thousand camera stores closed their doors.
It was a wonderful journey through the photo business. So many great experiences and opportunities to practice OBM and ABA. But the story is far from over. In 2010, I had an opportunity to apply my OBM/ABA approach in public schools. At first, my work was directed toward individual students. But from that vantage point I could see a great need for an OBM, ABA, and Business Management approach, i.e., key performance indicators, as at that time there was no standard way of monitoring behavioral interventions. When consistent data were collected, it tended to be count of occurrence, which was very difficult to do in school settings. Plus, when those data were graphed, there was a tremendous variety of graphing styles, making consistent interpretation very difficult. A standard approach was very much needed. As each teacher had access to Excel, I decided to use that as the data base engine. And so, one morning in 2010, bolstered by a fresh pot of coffee, I created the first version of Total Progress System. Now, thirteen years later, a full portfolio of data collection applications supports behavioral services in Sarasota County Schools.
The TPS portfolio continues to evolve as the need for information evolves. However, one of the most exciting aspects of TPS is that it is the information component of a behavioral systems approach. It is a common practice for ABA practitioners to view "feedback" as "reinforcement." However, in systems analysis, feedback does overlap in some ways with reinforcement, feedback has the additional meaning of information. Though this correspondence is important, there is far more to say about feedback from a systems perspective as articulated by the greats of that discipline, e.g., Ashby, Ackoff, Churchman, Flood, Jackson, to name but a few.
We now turn to some system ideas that will contribute importantly to Behavioral Systems Analysis, a composite of Applied Behavior Analysis, Organizational Behavior Management, and Systems Dynamics.
Behavioral Systems Analysis
In one of my systems seminars I hold a box containing parts of a flashlight and batteries. I then ask (with my very dry sense of humor) for participants to "think outside the box" to see if that helps to solve the problem. After a few strained seconds I suggest that perhaps we might consider the arrangement of things inside the box. I then ask participants to consider how they might rearrange the items in this box to function as a "light producing system." I then proceed with great fanfare to assemble the flashlight so that it now operates properly. Before I rearranged the flashlight components in the box (system), the light producing system was not functional. That is, it did not produce an emergent result. However, properly assembling the parts restored the functionality of the flashlight system, allowing potential energy in the battery to transmit through an electronic circuit to the bulb that converted energy into visible light.
The flashlight demonstration offers a convenient metaphor of a school system. While far more complex than a flashlight, we can use similar system principles to discuss ways to improve a school system, e.g., we can discuss the organization of system components, goals and objectives, transmission of information (energy), its response to feedback, all in the service of producing educationally relevant outcomes.
Of course we need more than a metaphor to improve students' behavior in schools - we need a model of the school system relating to students' behavior. As shown in the model below, eight components create the boundary of our system model that will be replicated across multiple performer groups.
Approaching my 42nd year of practice as a Behavior Analyst gives me pause to reflect on my career path. In graduate school at the University of Florida, I managed the Precision Teaching Laboratory and taught Applied Behavior Analysis to undergraduate students. At that point in time microcomputers were just starting to enter the market. Coincidentally, in my office there happened to be an IBM 5120 that was configured to run the computer language called APL. I became very interested in APL and wrote software to run the Precision Teaching Laboratory. APL is not used much these days, but it was a very sophisticated language that used matrices as the core building block.
After graduating from the University of Florida in 1984, I worked as a behavior analyst in a regional institutional settings for persons with disabilities. While that work was good, I wanted to practice Applied Behavior Analysis in the business setting, an area that we now know as Organizational Behavior Management (OBM). Given that OBM was a new area of practice it was difficult to find a job in this area - and frankly, still seems to be the case. However, my wife's parents owned a camera store - Sarasota Camera Exchange - and they invited me and my wife to move to Sarasota to join the family business. My role was to open a one hour photo lab in the camera store. Over the next 13 years the film and digital Imaging Center grew to become the most advanced camera store photo lab in the world, offering an unparalleled range of imaging services.
The Imaging Center, as we called it, was a crucible of creativity (and OBM opportunity.) We offered an enormous range of conventional photographic processes. As early adopters of digital imaging, we restored heirloom photographs, designed and produced trade show displays, slide shows, etc. Nowadays, creating a Powerpoint presentation is no big deal. But in the early 1990's, presentation slides were created by sending digital files to our film recorder which created film-based slides with the digital image. Of course, the slide film was then processed in our film processor and each slide was mounted using what always seemed as an exceedingly complicated machine for the purpose.
Sarasota Camera Exchange was well known in the photo industry. We worked closely with executives from major manufacturers, e.g., Kodak, Fuji, Nikon, Canon, Minolta, Ricoh, to share our experiences as a "boots on the ground" company. Executives from these companies were not familiar with OBM, but open to it. On occasion I did have opportunities to share some OBM ideas, but I would be remiss if I did not also mention that each of these executives were highly intelligent and very sophisticated in their thinking about business, and I learned so much from them about business management, ideas that collaborated well with the OBM perspective.
In 1997 the photo industry was experiencing a great consolidation with Wolf Camera and Ritz Camera (by the way, the owners are cousins) buying up independent camera stores. Wolf Camera gave us the proverbial offer we couldn't refuse and so Sarasota Camera became one of 600 stores owned by Wolf Camera. I stayed on to become a District Manager, responsible for fifteen stores. A few years later, Wolf Camera sold to Ritz Camera and I then had an opportunity to learn another style of multi-store management. The retail store environment taught me much about (organizational) management systems, e.g., profit & loss statements, key performance indicators, process management, quality control, marketing, training, etc. However, each of those systems also connected to behavior - of employees, customers, camera manufacturers, etc., providing excellent opportunities to practice Organizational Behavior Management.
At that time, drugstores were promoting their one hour labs, increasing the competitive environment. What was needed was some good old fashioned "stimulus control." I phoned David Ritz (owner of Ritz Camera) and suggested that we create a "discriminative stimulus" for photo processing done at Ritz Camera, one that was not available (S-Delta) at drugstores. I called this (verbal) stimulus, "Camera Store Processing" and this was simplified as CSQ. Ritz fully embraced the idea and it became the cornerstone of Ritz's marketing campaign, with CSQ proudly emblazoned on every film processing envelope, advertisement, etc. It is difficult to estimate the number of instances of CSQ across various marketing campaigns, but most certainly that number is very large.
In 2006, as the exponential growth of digital cameras continued to erode Ritz Camera's "cash cow" of film and print processing revenue, I could clearly see the proverbial writing on the wall that the photo business was going to fail, urging me to consider another turn in my career path. I then returned to the direct practice of Applied Behavior Analysis as a private practitioner. Unfortunately, for Ritz Camera, my prediction did come true. A few years later, Ritz Camera declared bankruptcy and with it, a thousand camera stores closed their doors.
It was a wonderful journey through the photo business. So many great experiences and opportunities to practice OBM and ABA. But the story is far from over. In 2010, I had an opportunity to apply my OBM/ABA approach in public schools. At first, my work was directed toward individual students. But from that vantage point I could see a great need for an OBM, ABA, and Business Management approach, i.e., key performance indicators, as at that time there was no standard way of monitoring behavioral interventions. When consistent data were collected, it tended to be count of occurrence, which was very difficult to do in school settings. Plus, when those data were graphed, there was a tremendous variety of graphing styles, making consistent interpretation very difficult. A standard approach was very much needed. As each teacher had access to Excel, I decided to use that as the data base engine. And so, one morning in 2010, bolstered by a fresh pot of coffee, I created the first version of Total Progress System. Now, thirteen years later, a full portfolio of data collection applications supports behavioral services in Sarasota County Schools.
The TPS portfolio continues to evolve as the need for information evolves. However, one of the most exciting aspects of TPS is that it is the information component of a behavioral systems approach. It is a common practice for ABA practitioners to view "feedback" as "reinforcement." However, in systems analysis, feedback does overlap in some ways with reinforcement, feedback has the additional meaning of information. Though this correspondence is important, there is far more to say about feedback from a systems perspective as articulated by the greats of that discipline, e.g., Ashby, Ackoff, Churchman, Flood, Jackson, to name but a few.
We now turn to some system ideas that will contribute importantly to Behavioral Systems Analysis, a composite of Applied Behavior Analysis, Organizational Behavior Management, and Systems Dynamics.
Behavioral Systems Analysis
In one of my systems seminars I hold a box containing parts of a flashlight and batteries. I then ask (with my very dry sense of humor) for participants to "think outside the box" to see if that helps to solve the problem. After a few strained seconds I suggest that perhaps we might consider the arrangement of things inside the box. I then ask participants to consider how they might rearrange the items in this box to function as a "light producing system." I then proceed with great fanfare to assemble the flashlight so that it now operates properly. Before I rearranged the flashlight components in the box (system), the light producing system was not functional. That is, it did not produce an emergent result. However, properly assembling the parts restored the functionality of the flashlight system, allowing potential energy in the battery to transmit through an electronic circuit to the bulb that converted energy into visible light.
The flashlight demonstration offers a convenient metaphor of a school system. While far more complex than a flashlight, we can use similar system principles to discuss ways to improve a school system, e.g., we can discuss the organization of system components, goals and objectives, transmission of information (energy), its response to feedback, all in the service of producing educationally relevant outcomes.
Of course we need more than a metaphor to improve students' behavior in schools - we need a model of the school system relating to students' behavior. As shown in the model below, eight components create the boundary of our system model that will be replicated across multiple performer groups.
Behavioral System Components
When a student exhibits behaviors of concern, a school's Behavior Specialist (or other assigned staff) is asked to conduct a Functional Behavior Assessment to determine the function (purpose) of the student's challenging behavior, with the goal of redirecting that supporting function by enabling the child to obtain similar outcomes by using socially appropriate (replacement) behavior. While essential to intervention planning, the method of functional replacement does not identify the contribution of deficient skills to the maintenance of the student's challenging behavior. We commonly see this limitation in classroom situations when functional analysis identifies a relationship between a student's aggression and escape from academic tasks. Too often, the prevailing wisdom is to teach the student how to more appropriately request a break from the unwanted academic task. While a sensible approach to reducing the student's aggression, this leaves unanswered questions about how to help the student be a better learner, how to improve social skills so that the student can access valued friendships, how to utilize organizational/executive skills to improve work efficiency, and so on.
Our behavioral systems approach identifies the larger context of the student's challenging behavior as organized in eight program areas called system components. Functional Behavior Analysis (FBA) and Behavior Intervention Plans (BIP) are of course included as system components. However, the behavioral system identifies seven other components contributing to behavioral success. For example, the Positive Behavior Intervention Support (PBIS) & Classroom Management component specifies reinforcement systems to support students' character education, e.g., behaviors of respect, responsibility, resilience, etc. Similarly, the Social & Emotional Skills component specifies behaviors and reinforcement systems for students' executive functions, social skills, self-awareness, rule following, etc.
The great benefit of this approach comes from identifying and remediating deficient component processes to improve student performance. When a student learns social & emotional skills, when the classroom is managed with positive reinforcement for character behaviors, when the student receives effective mental health counseling, when the student's self-awareness is supported, etc., the students will have acquired skills necessary to be successful in the school setting.
When a student exhibits behaviors of concern, a school's Behavior Specialist (or other assigned staff) is asked to conduct a Functional Behavior Assessment to determine the function (purpose) of the student's challenging behavior, with the goal of redirecting that supporting function by enabling the child to obtain similar outcomes by using socially appropriate (replacement) behavior. While essential to intervention planning, the method of functional replacement does not identify the contribution of deficient skills to the maintenance of the student's challenging behavior. We commonly see this limitation in classroom situations when functional analysis identifies a relationship between a student's aggression and escape from academic tasks. Too often, the prevailing wisdom is to teach the student how to more appropriately request a break from the unwanted academic task. While a sensible approach to reducing the student's aggression, this leaves unanswered questions about how to help the student be a better learner, how to improve social skills so that the student can access valued friendships, how to utilize organizational/executive skills to improve work efficiency, and so on.
Our behavioral systems approach identifies the larger context of the student's challenging behavior as organized in eight program areas called system components. Functional Behavior Analysis (FBA) and Behavior Intervention Plans (BIP) are of course included as system components. However, the behavioral system identifies seven other components contributing to behavioral success. For example, the Positive Behavior Intervention Support (PBIS) & Classroom Management component specifies reinforcement systems to support students' character education, e.g., behaviors of respect, responsibility, resilience, etc. Similarly, the Social & Emotional Skills component specifies behaviors and reinforcement systems for students' executive functions, social skills, self-awareness, rule following, etc.
The great benefit of this approach comes from identifying and remediating deficient component processes to improve student performance. When a student learns social & emotional skills, when the classroom is managed with positive reinforcement for character behaviors, when the student receives effective mental health counseling, when the student's self-awareness is supported, etc., the students will have acquired skills necessary to be successful in the school setting.
The Behavioral System Model
The Behavioral System Model uniquely considers interactions between performers. The Zometool (C) model, shown at right, rotates and replicates the preceding eight-component radial diagram, showing how each performer relates to each system component.
White spheres are designated as system components; central yellow spheres are designated as performers. The geometry of Zometool modelling allows for a ten component symmetry. However, our Behavioral System in schools uses eight components (white spheres). In this depiction of the Behavioral System model, names of system components are listed at the student level, but only the component name of PBIS is shown at each subsequent level. Displaying names for all components would unnecessarily clutter the appearance of the model. However, each component is replicated at each performer level.
The Behavioral System Model enables us to manage processes at each performer group level at the organizational level, or to manage processes for individual performers to manage an individual student's intervention, e.g., to identify processes currently supporting a student's excessive behaviors, e.g., aggression, and deficient behaviors, e.g., problem-solving, executive functions, self-awareness, language skills, etc., as well as to manage support processes at each performer level, e.g., teacher, administrator, parent, para-professional, etc.
The Behavioral System Model uses blue and red struts to depict primary connections between components and performers. However, each element in the model relates to every other element at all other levels. For example, a school administrator may monitor the teacher's implementation of the behavior intervention plan (BIP), as measured by TPS data collection, the result of which may be monitored by the parent, and then communicated to the student, etc.
The Behavioral System Model uniquely considers interactions between performers. The Zometool (C) model, shown at right, rotates and replicates the preceding eight-component radial diagram, showing how each performer relates to each system component.
White spheres are designated as system components; central yellow spheres are designated as performers. The geometry of Zometool modelling allows for a ten component symmetry. However, our Behavioral System in schools uses eight components (white spheres). In this depiction of the Behavioral System model, names of system components are listed at the student level, but only the component name of PBIS is shown at each subsequent level. Displaying names for all components would unnecessarily clutter the appearance of the model. However, each component is replicated at each performer level.
The Behavioral System Model enables us to manage processes at each performer group level at the organizational level, or to manage processes for individual performers to manage an individual student's intervention, e.g., to identify processes currently supporting a student's excessive behaviors, e.g., aggression, and deficient behaviors, e.g., problem-solving, executive functions, self-awareness, language skills, etc., as well as to manage support processes at each performer level, e.g., teacher, administrator, parent, para-professional, etc.
The Behavioral System Model uses blue and red struts to depict primary connections between components and performers. However, each element in the model relates to every other element at all other levels. For example, a school administrator may monitor the teacher's implementation of the behavior intervention plan (BIP), as measured by TPS data collection, the result of which may be monitored by the parent, and then communicated to the student, etc.
Perspectives
Perspectives organize sets of contingencies that affect our behavior. For example, the perspective of Policies & Rules summarizes the great variety of contingencies that are stated by language. Behavior & Performance summarizes the great variety of actions required to contact Outcomes & Feedback - consequent events that support those actions. Culture & Beliefs reflect social contingencies and Assessment & Learning reflects how we analyze a situation and acquire skills that increase our access to desired Outcomes & Feedback.
Each performer has a unique perspective resulting from their unique behavioral histories. As with most things we study, we can never know everything about it, and thus our study of a performer's perspectives is never complete. However, complete knowledge is not the goal of a systems analysis. Rather, the goal is to know enough about a system to facilitate decisions of ways to effect meaningful change.
Action & Sequence refers to the organization of behavior. For example, when we speak, our words organize phonemes, sentences organize words, communicated concepts summarize sentences, and so on, thus illustrating the fluid nature of the behavioral flow. There is no universally valuable unit of action, nor is there a universally valuable action sequence. Units of action & sequence are forged by their relationship with other perspective elements in the model.
Risk & Reward refers to our use of language to predict the relationship between Action & Sequence and Outcomes & Feedback. Impulsive behavior often interferes with this process, though pre-planning all of our actions is equally problematic. Imagine how distracted you would be if you were to think about the implications of each action. Risk & Reward must therefore be balanced by the extent of Action & Sequence. When I am offered a box of chocolates, which one do I choose? When I am developing a high profile presentation, what do I include in each slide frame? Risk & Reward thus involves the idea of probability. One of the goals of Behavior Analysis has been to quantify the probability of the next occurrence of behavior. In practice this has been difficult to achieve. However, given that behavior is a function of the environment, and given that we can observe the environment, we can sidestep the problem of predicting the probability of behavior by instead predicting the probability of various outcomes resulting from behavior. Our interest then is less about the probability of picking a particular chocolate and more about the probability that the selected chocolate is valuable.
Outcomes & Feedback refer to the effect of consequences on the likelihood of action when similar circumstances are again presented in the future. In common usage, the word, consequence is often used to refer to punishment presented to dissuade further occurrences of behavior. However, consequences are by no means limited to the presentation of punishers. Indeed, the presentation of positive consequences, i.e., reinforcers forms the foundation of modern behavioral technology. While there is an apparent simplicity to the idea that positive reinforcers increase the likelihood of behavior and punishers decrease the likelihood of behavior, the processes involved in these effects are more complex. For example, removal of a reinforcer functions as a punisher, while removal of a punisher functions as a reinforcer. We must also consider how intermittent relationships determine relative value. For example, how does a situation that presents a choice of no outcome, versus a choice of a low-yield outcome compare to a choice of a low-yield outcome and a high-yield outcome? In the first pair, we assume that a person would choose the low-yield outcome, as the other choice would yield no outcome. However, in the second situation, the low-yield outcome is viewed as less desirable.
Feedback introduces still another layer of complexity. Like reinforcers and punishers, feedback is defined by the outcome of a process on behavior. However, while the effect of reinforcement is defined by the resulting change in the likelihood of behavior, feedback is defined by a resulting change in the value of a stimulus. A negative feedback loop is defined by the relationship between behavior and the reduction of a discrepancy between the value of a stimulus and a standard. The common example to illustrate this process is the behavior of an air conditioner's thermostat. Here, the corrective action (cooling the room) stops when the discrepancy between the set temperature and ambient temperature of the room is eliminated. In contrast, a positive feedback loop is defined by the expansion of the value of a stimulus from a standard, such as when someone is running away from an attacker. In common life situations we find that negative feedback loops and positive feedback loops work simultaneously. For example, when someone is running away from an attacker - and thus increasing the distance from perceived danger, that person is also likely to be running toward safety.
How does feedback compare to more traditional concepts of reinforcement. Specifically, is positive reinforcement the same as positive feedback, and is negative reinforcement the same as negative feedback? Indeed there are important connections to be made as reinforcement and feedback processes overlap. One way to distinguish reinforcement from feedback is to consider that reinforcers emphasize the strengthening or selection of behavior, while feedback emphasizes information about the conditions of the situation. The effect of reinforcement is measured by a change in the likelihood of behavior compared to all other actions in a person's repertoire. The effect of feedback is to inform the person on progress made in obtaining the desired outcome in real time.
Policies and Rules are written guides of organizational behavior. Policies describe an organization's values while rules specify relations between actions and outcomes. For example, a policy at school may be to involve parents in situations when a student exhibits highly aggressive behavior in the classroom. A rule directed toward this behavior might specify punitive outcomes for the student, along with mandatory restorative actions toward the offended person, etc. As most schools have rules prohibiting aggression toward others, and as most aggressive students are well aware of those rules, it begs the question as to the effectiveness of those rules - and the contingencies they specify. Unfortunately, too often students who exhibit aggression find the value of such aggression to be much greater - particularly at the moment they exhibit aggression - than the punitive outcomes to be presented in the future, e.g., documentation of the offense, restriction to in-school suspension, out-of-school suspension, etc. To offset the influence of these maladaptive rules and the behavior that follows, is not to increase the magnitude of punitive outcomes, but to increase the magnitude of positive outcomes by new rules that gradually specify relationships between learning and personal success.
Culture & Beliefs are unwritten, socially communicated norms that emerge from the implementation of rules within an organization. In an organization such as a company, a culture consolidates and communicates employees' perception of best practices. The culture at the management level in an organization might diverge from the culture at the R&D level, sales level, HR level, etc., leading to reduction in efficiency. Establishing a universally applicable mission and vision statement can help to align varying cultures so that each cultural group contributes to meaningful corporate growth.
Perspectives in Practice
Perspectives guide intervention practices because they summarize sets of contingencies that are fundamental to behavior. Thus, if a system analysis indicated a need for a teacher to implement a Behavior Intervention Plan (BIP), the teacher must learn how to do so. We would first need to assess the teacher's implementation skill (Assessment and Learning), followed by instruction on new intervention practices and strategies (Behavior & Performance). We would then provide the teacher with performance feedback through natural outcomes (e.g., student's behavior improves), as well as social feedback from other persons in the behavioral system (Outcomes & Feedback). We would then support the teacher's progress by summarizing contingencies with rules relevant to the implementation of the BIP (Policies & Rules), as well as integrating BIP strategies with the teacher's personal belief system (Culture & Beliefs).
Perspectives organize sets of contingencies that affect our behavior. For example, the perspective of Policies & Rules summarizes the great variety of contingencies that are stated by language. Behavior & Performance summarizes the great variety of actions required to contact Outcomes & Feedback - consequent events that support those actions. Culture & Beliefs reflect social contingencies and Assessment & Learning reflects how we analyze a situation and acquire skills that increase our access to desired Outcomes & Feedback.
Each performer has a unique perspective resulting from their unique behavioral histories. As with most things we study, we can never know everything about it, and thus our study of a performer's perspectives is never complete. However, complete knowledge is not the goal of a systems analysis. Rather, the goal is to know enough about a system to facilitate decisions of ways to effect meaningful change.
Action & Sequence refers to the organization of behavior. For example, when we speak, our words organize phonemes, sentences organize words, communicated concepts summarize sentences, and so on, thus illustrating the fluid nature of the behavioral flow. There is no universally valuable unit of action, nor is there a universally valuable action sequence. Units of action & sequence are forged by their relationship with other perspective elements in the model.
Risk & Reward refers to our use of language to predict the relationship between Action & Sequence and Outcomes & Feedback. Impulsive behavior often interferes with this process, though pre-planning all of our actions is equally problematic. Imagine how distracted you would be if you were to think about the implications of each action. Risk & Reward must therefore be balanced by the extent of Action & Sequence. When I am offered a box of chocolates, which one do I choose? When I am developing a high profile presentation, what do I include in each slide frame? Risk & Reward thus involves the idea of probability. One of the goals of Behavior Analysis has been to quantify the probability of the next occurrence of behavior. In practice this has been difficult to achieve. However, given that behavior is a function of the environment, and given that we can observe the environment, we can sidestep the problem of predicting the probability of behavior by instead predicting the probability of various outcomes resulting from behavior. Our interest then is less about the probability of picking a particular chocolate and more about the probability that the selected chocolate is valuable.
Outcomes & Feedback refer to the effect of consequences on the likelihood of action when similar circumstances are again presented in the future. In common usage, the word, consequence is often used to refer to punishment presented to dissuade further occurrences of behavior. However, consequences are by no means limited to the presentation of punishers. Indeed, the presentation of positive consequences, i.e., reinforcers forms the foundation of modern behavioral technology. While there is an apparent simplicity to the idea that positive reinforcers increase the likelihood of behavior and punishers decrease the likelihood of behavior, the processes involved in these effects are more complex. For example, removal of a reinforcer functions as a punisher, while removal of a punisher functions as a reinforcer. We must also consider how intermittent relationships determine relative value. For example, how does a situation that presents a choice of no outcome, versus a choice of a low-yield outcome compare to a choice of a low-yield outcome and a high-yield outcome? In the first pair, we assume that a person would choose the low-yield outcome, as the other choice would yield no outcome. However, in the second situation, the low-yield outcome is viewed as less desirable.
Feedback introduces still another layer of complexity. Like reinforcers and punishers, feedback is defined by the outcome of a process on behavior. However, while the effect of reinforcement is defined by the resulting change in the likelihood of behavior, feedback is defined by a resulting change in the value of a stimulus. A negative feedback loop is defined by the relationship between behavior and the reduction of a discrepancy between the value of a stimulus and a standard. The common example to illustrate this process is the behavior of an air conditioner's thermostat. Here, the corrective action (cooling the room) stops when the discrepancy between the set temperature and ambient temperature of the room is eliminated. In contrast, a positive feedback loop is defined by the expansion of the value of a stimulus from a standard, such as when someone is running away from an attacker. In common life situations we find that negative feedback loops and positive feedback loops work simultaneously. For example, when someone is running away from an attacker - and thus increasing the distance from perceived danger, that person is also likely to be running toward safety.
How does feedback compare to more traditional concepts of reinforcement. Specifically, is positive reinforcement the same as positive feedback, and is negative reinforcement the same as negative feedback? Indeed there are important connections to be made as reinforcement and feedback processes overlap. One way to distinguish reinforcement from feedback is to consider that reinforcers emphasize the strengthening or selection of behavior, while feedback emphasizes information about the conditions of the situation. The effect of reinforcement is measured by a change in the likelihood of behavior compared to all other actions in a person's repertoire. The effect of feedback is to inform the person on progress made in obtaining the desired outcome in real time.
Policies and Rules are written guides of organizational behavior. Policies describe an organization's values while rules specify relations between actions and outcomes. For example, a policy at school may be to involve parents in situations when a student exhibits highly aggressive behavior in the classroom. A rule directed toward this behavior might specify punitive outcomes for the student, along with mandatory restorative actions toward the offended person, etc. As most schools have rules prohibiting aggression toward others, and as most aggressive students are well aware of those rules, it begs the question as to the effectiveness of those rules - and the contingencies they specify. Unfortunately, too often students who exhibit aggression find the value of such aggression to be much greater - particularly at the moment they exhibit aggression - than the punitive outcomes to be presented in the future, e.g., documentation of the offense, restriction to in-school suspension, out-of-school suspension, etc. To offset the influence of these maladaptive rules and the behavior that follows, is not to increase the magnitude of punitive outcomes, but to increase the magnitude of positive outcomes by new rules that gradually specify relationships between learning and personal success.
Culture & Beliefs are unwritten, socially communicated norms that emerge from the implementation of rules within an organization. In an organization such as a company, a culture consolidates and communicates employees' perception of best practices. The culture at the management level in an organization might diverge from the culture at the R&D level, sales level, HR level, etc., leading to reduction in efficiency. Establishing a universally applicable mission and vision statement can help to align varying cultures so that each cultural group contributes to meaningful corporate growth.
Perspectives in Practice
Perspectives guide intervention practices because they summarize sets of contingencies that are fundamental to behavior. Thus, if a system analysis indicated a need for a teacher to implement a Behavior Intervention Plan (BIP), the teacher must learn how to do so. We would first need to assess the teacher's implementation skill (Assessment and Learning), followed by instruction on new intervention practices and strategies (Behavior & Performance). We would then provide the teacher with performance feedback through natural outcomes (e.g., student's behavior improves), as well as social feedback from other persons in the behavioral system (Outcomes & Feedback). We would then support the teacher's progress by summarizing contingencies with rules relevant to the implementation of the BIP (Policies & Rules), as well as integrating BIP strategies with the teacher's personal belief system (Culture & Beliefs).