Practitioner Development

Performance Assessment of Organizations

McGee et al. (2021) · Journal of Organizational Behavior Management 2021
★ The Verdict

Keep your HR surveys—just call them measures of reinforcement history and you stay behavior-analytic without new software.

✓ Read this if BCBAs who must use HR surveys but want to talk contingencies.
✗ Skip if Clinicians who already run direct observation systems and do not touch org data.

01Research in Context

01

What this study did

McGee et al. (2021) looked at the surveys HR teams love. They asked, "What if we call these things measures of reinforcement history?"

The paper shows how to swap survey labels for behavior-speak. Same questions, new map.

02

What they found

The authors found no magic new tool. They found a new lens.

Relabel a pulse survey as a "contingency check" and you can keep your data and talk like a behavior analyst.

03

How this fits with other research

Christopher et al. (1991) warned us that social-validity surveys often turn into empty rituals. McGee agrees and gives the ritual a behavior-analytic coat of paint.

Singh et al. (1993) told us to drop trait quizzes and watch what people do. McGee keeps the quiz but rewrites the headline so it points to behavior, not traits.

Maguire et al. (2022) went further. They ditched surveys and used hands-on BST plus PM to push staff to 100% COVID protocol. McGee gives you the option to stay with surveys if you must; Maguire shows what happens when you leap to direct training.

04

Why it matters

You can start Monday. Take the staff-engagement survey your agency already buys. Rename each item so it tracks antecedents, behavior, or consequences. Share the new labels with your team. You keep the data stream, gain a behavior-analytic story, and avoid another vendor search.

Free CEUs

Want CEUs on This Topic?

The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.

Join Free →
→ Action — try this Monday

Open the next staff survey and rewrite three items so they name antecedents, behaviors, and consequences.

02At a glance

Intervention
not applicable
Design
theoretical
Finding
not reported

03Original abstract

As Organizational Behavior Management was borne out of Applied Behavior Analysis, so too is its approach to assessing environmental variables before implementing solutions for behavior change. This article discusses several types of organizational assessments used by researchers and practitioners. Behavior Systems Analysis (BSA) and Performance Management (PM) are the two most common assessment and intervention approaches used in OBM. These two methods are compared and contrasted and the levels and analyses within BSA are discussed. Also included in this article are common organizational assessments that are used by consultants and human resources professionals that are not typically used by OBM practitioners (change readiness, culture/engagement, and pulse surveys). These traditional assessments are approached through a behavior analytic lens and ways in which OBM practitioners can use them to assess and influence behavior is provided. A sustainability (otherwise known as maintenance or generalization) assessment is also included that builds upon previous research (e.g.) and experience through private practice.

Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 2021 · doi:10.1080/01608061.2021.1909687