The case against negative consequences

behavioral scientists have found negative consequences can permanently suppress behavior if the punishment is severe, certain, and immediate (Azrin and Holz, 1966). However, before using the stick, you should understand the practical limitations and undesirable side effects of using negative consequences to influence behavior. 

Skinner (1953) deplored the fact that the commonest technique of control in modem life is punishment (page 182). He protested against the human preoccupation with 

Aggression. Instead of escaping, people might choose to attack those perceived to be in charge. For example, murder in the workplace is rapidly increasing in the United States, 

I met an employee once who exerted countercontrol by wearing safety glasses without lenses when wearing his safety frames, he got attention and approval from certain coworkers. Perhaps these coworkers were rewarded vicariously when seeing him beat the system they perceived was controlling them also. 

Let us specifically discuss fraditional discipline for safety—a form of top-down control with negative consequences. I have met many managers who include a discipline session as part of the corrective action for an injury report. The injured employee gets a negative lecture from a manager or supervisor whose safety record and personal performance appraisal were tarnished by the injury. 

---