Behavior analysis and the R&D paradigm.

The author asked a simple question: why do great behavior-analytic ideas sit on shelves for years? He sketched a new game plan called the R&D paradigm. The plan has three parts: pick outcomes that real users care about, test ideas with a mixed team, and pass the winners to everyday settings fast.

The paper is a map, not a scoreboard. It says our field should act like a tech company. Define the customer first, run quick pilots, and scale only what works. The goal is to cut the lag between lab discovery and classroom or clinic use.

Normand et al. (2021) extend the same logic to public health. They keep the user-first mindset but aim at whole towns instead of single clients.

Napolitano et al. (2025) take the idea further and tell BCBAs to step into policy meetings. They turn the R&D loop outward: test, then lobby for system-level adoption.

Joyce et al. (1988) beat everyone to the punch. They already urged analysts to give data to lawmakers, but without the tidy R&D frame. The 2000 paper simply adds clearer steps.

If you run sessions, supervise, or train staff, you are the R&D lab. Pick one skill your teachers or parents actually want this month. Measure it for two weeks, tweak, and share the graph at the next team meeting. That tiny loop is the R&D spirit in action.