This comparison draws in part from “5 Ways to Boost Staff Productivity” by Erin Mayberry, BCBA (BehaviorLive), and extends it with peer-reviewed research from our library of 27,900+ ABA research articles. The decision framework, BACB ethics code references, and cross-links below are synthesized by Behaviorist Book Club.
View the original presentation →When a BCBA supervisor identifies a productivity or performance gap in their staff team, they face a practical choice about which OBM tool to deploy first. Two of the most well-supported tools in the OBM literature are performance feedback — the systematic delivery of specific information about past behavior — and contingency management systems — the formal arrangement of antecedents and consequences to make target behaviors more or less likely.
Both tools are grounded in behavioral principles and supported by decades of OBM research. Their effectiveness, however, depends on matching the tool to the function of the performance problem. Performance feedback works most directly on behavior that staff are already capable of but need more information or reinforcement to sustain. Contingency management systems work more broadly by restructuring the antecedent and consequent conditions that control performance — useful when the behavioral environment is systematically misaligned with target performance.
Understanding the mechanisms, evidence bases, and appropriate use cases for each tool allows BCBAs in supervisory roles to deploy OBM interventions strategically rather than defaulting to the one they are most comfortable with.
| Factor | Evidence-Based Approach | Traditional Approach |
|---|---|---|
| Primary Behavioral Mechanism | Performance Feedback: Provides information that functions as a discriminative stimulus for correct behavior and as reinforcement for accurate performance history | Contingency Management: Restructures the antecedent and consequence environment to make target behaviors more likely to occur and be reinforced |
| Implementation Simplicity | Performance Feedback: Relatively simple to implement — requires observation, data review, and regular delivery; can begin immediately | Contingency Management: Requires design time to specify contingencies, identify meaningful reinforcers, and create tracking systems; more complex to implement |
| Best Indicated For | Performance Feedback: Staff with adequate skills who need more consistent information about how they are performing; performance deficits where skill is present | Contingency Management: Systemic performance gaps across a team; situations where current consequences are not maintaining target behavior; when feedback alone has not produced improvement |
| Maintenance Without System | Performance Feedback: Performance gains may decay if feedback is discontinued — behavior returns toward baseline without the discriminative stimulus function of feedback | Contingency Management: Better maintenance if natural contingencies are engaged; fades more gracefully when designed to approximate natural reinforcement patterns |
| Staff Experience | Performance Feedback: Generally perceived as supportive if delivered correctly; can feel punitive if primarily corrective or delivered publicly | Contingency Management: Can feel motivating if transparently designed with staff input; can feel manipulative if perceived as surveillance-based or arbitrarily punitive |
| Evidence Base | Performance Feedback: Among the most consistently supported OBM interventions across human service, education, and business settings | Contingency Management: Strong evidence base particularly for token economies and incentive systems in educational and residential settings; OBM literature supports performance-contingent systems |
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ on-demand CEUs including ethics, supervision, and clinical topics like this one. Plus a new live CEU every Wednesday.
Use this framework when approaching 5 ways to boost staff productivity in your practice:
Does the data support a need for intervention? Is there a meaningful impact on the individual's quality of life, safety, or access to reinforcement?
YES → Proceed to assessment NO → Document reasoning, monitor
A functional assessment should guide intervention selection. Avoid defaulting to standard protocols without individual analysis. Consider environmental variables, setting events, and private events.
YES → Select evidence-based approach matched to function NO → Complete assessment first
Goals should be co-developed. Assent and informed consent are ethical requirements. The individual's preferences and values matter in selecting both goals and methods.
YES → Proceed with collaborative plan NO → Engage in shared decision-making
This course covers the clinical and ethical dimensions in detail with structured learning objectives and CEU credit.
5 Ways to Boost Staff Productivity — Erin Mayberry · 0 BACB General CEUs · $0
Take This Course →We extended this decision guide with research from our library — dig into the peer-reviewed studies behind each approach, in plain-English summaries written for BCBAs.
258 research articles with practitioner takeaways
239 research articles with practitioner takeaways
233 research articles with practitioner takeaways
BACB General CEUs · $0 · BehaviorLive
Research-backed educational guide
Research-backed answers for behavior analysts
All behavior-analytic intervention is individualized. The information on this page is for educational purposes and does not constitute clinical advice. Treatment decisions should be informed by the best available published research, individualized assessment, and obtained with the informed consent of the client or their legal guardian. Behavior analysts are responsible for practicing within the boundaries of their competence and adhering to the BACB Ethics Code for Behavior Analysts.