Use of the performance diagnostic checklist to select an intervention designed to increase the offering of promotional stamps at two sites of a restaurant franchise

Journal of Organizational Behavior Management (Impact Factor: 1.23). 01/2005; 25(3):17-36. DOI: 10.1300/J075v25n03_02

ABSTRACT The performance diagnostic checklist (PDC) was administered to examine the variables influencing the offering of promotional stamps by employees at two sites of a restaurant franchise. PDC results suggested that a lack of appropriate antecedents, equipment and processes, and consequences were responsible for the deficits. Based on these results, an intervention consisting of task clarification, self-monitoring, equipment modification, goal setting, and graphic feedback was implemented and evaluated with a multiple baseline design across settings. The results for restaurant 1 yielded baseline and intervention means of 25% and 72% respectively. The results for restaurant 2 yielded baseline and intervention means of 11% and 80%, respectively. Overall, these results suggest that the PDC is a useful tool for guiding intervention selection for performance deficits which occur across more than one site.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Engagement is a “buzz” word that has gained popularity in Industrial/Organizational Psychology. Based on a “Positive Psychology” approach, engagement is perceived as a valuable state for employees, because surveys on the construct have found it correlates with some organizational tactics (e.g., human resource policies, procedural justice) and positive outcomes (e.g., growth, lower costs, lower absenteeism). Reviews of the engagement literature suggest engagement is not clearly defined, which is common with some popular cognitive/emotional constructs. Positive Psychology is nothing new to behavior analysis (Luthans, Youssef, & Rawski, 2011), which has many applications through the field of Organizational Behavior Management to create an “engaged” workforce and culture.
    Journal of Organizational Behavior Management 01/2012; 32(1):75-82. · 1.23 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The three-contingency model of performance management (Malott, 1992, 1993, 1999) was used to analyze interventions in the Journal of Organizational Behavior Management (JOBM) from the years 1990 through 2005 (Volume 11[1] –Volume 25[4]). The current article extends previous reviews (Malott, Shimamune, & Malott, 1992; Otto & Malott, 2004) by assessing how behavior analysts have applied this level of analysis in the description of interventions and the importance of this conceptual precision when describing maintaining variables. All 48 studies meeting criteria for inclusion in the current article involved indirect-acting contingencies with outcomes too delayed to reinforce the causal response. Only 17 of the 24 articles that described the performance-management contingencies described them correctly in terms of the maintaining behavioral mechanisms.
    Journal of Organizational Behavior Management 11/2008; 28(4):260-285. · 1.23 Impact Factor
  • Industrial and Organizational Psychology 06/2011; 4(2). · 0.65 Impact Factor