Practitioner Development

Toward an operant model of power in organizations.

Goltz (2003) · The Behavior analyst 2003
★ The Verdict

Power equals control of reinforcement; map those contingencies to see who really runs the room.

✓ Read this if BCBAs who consult in schools, clinics, or businesses and need to change staff behavior.
✗ Skip if Clinicians looking for direct client intervention data.

01Research in Context

01

What this study did

Campbell (2003) wrote a think-piece, not an experiment. The paper builds a new way to talk about power at work. It says power is just who can hand out or take away reinforcers.

The author maps out how bosses, coworkers, and even clients control pay, praise, or perks. If you can change those things, you have power.

02

What they found

There are no numbers. The product is a clear, operant language for power. You draw a simple diagram: list who delivers or blocks the goodies. That map shows who really shapes behavior in any team.

03

How this fits with other research

Scibak (2025) extends the same idea to politics. Voting, lobbying, and law-making are just bigger reinforcement games. The 2003 workplace model and the 2025 civic model fit together like Lego blocks.

Guerin (1992) and Assumpcão Júnior (1998) did the same trick for rituals and religion. They showed that group-level contingencies keep people bowing, singing, or fasting. Campbell (2003) repeats the move for office life.

Hake (1982) asked for more human operant theory years earlier. Campbell (2003) answers that call with a ready-to-use power map.

04

Why it matters

Next time you consult in a school or company, stop guessing who is in charge. Ask, "Who hands out the reinforcers?" Draw the map with staff. Then shift those contingencies to support the behaviors you want to see.

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

List every reinforcer in your setting and who delivers it. Share the list with your team.

02At a glance

Intervention
not applicable
Design
theoretical
Finding
not reported

03Original abstract

The purpose of this paper is to suggest that behavior analysis can help to explain social power. In this approach, an individual's potential for influence is thought to be partially a function of his or her access to stimuli that can be used as consequences. This access can occur either through direct authority or indirectly through social networks and exchanges. Social power is also thought to be a function of an individual's skill in delivering the stimuli in ways that will have the most impact on behavior. A number of predictions about power based on an operant approach are offered.

The Behavior analyst, 2003 · doi:10.1007/BF03392071