Motivation and Complex Verbal Phenomena: Implications for Organizational Research and Practice

Maraccini et al. (2016) wrote a theory paper. They asked: what if company rules, goals, and value statements work like motivational fuel?

They used Relational Frame Theory to argue that spoken or written rules can act like motivating operations. The paper gives no new data; it maps out how BCBAs can treat words as power sources.

The authors show that a rule such as "Safety first" can momentarily make safe behavior more valuable. When the rule is new, it can boost effort the same way a bonus does.

Over time the effect fades unless the rule is tied to real consequences. The paper lists ways to keep the verbal buzz alive: repeat the rule, pair it with praise, and let staff see it work.

Bottini et al. (2025) extend the idea to burnout. They say praise for overwork is also a verbal motivator that can push staff past healthy limits. Together the two papers show words can lift or drain staff.

Critchfield (2018) urges grad programs to teach stimulus-relations skills. Maraccini gives a clear payoff: use those skills to craft rules that motivate teams.

Spencer et al. (2022) look at the flip side—countercontrol. Their RFT view says staff may mentally reverse a rule ("They say safety first, but they reward speed"). This is not a clash; it warns you to align rules with real contingencies or risk silent push-back.

You can turn mission statements into immediate performance tools. State the rule, show it working, and reinforce compliance. Do this in huddles, emails, or feedback sessions. The paper gives BCBAs a low-cost way to boost safety, sales, or treatment fidelity without extra pay or points.