By Matt Harrington, BCBA · Behaviorist Book Club · Clinical decision guide
One of the most consequential decisions a behavior analyst makes is not just what intervention to use, but how to approach the clinical question in the first place. For empowering staff through pips, the difference between an evidence-based, individualized approach and a traditional, protocol-driven one can significantly impact outcomes.
This guide lays out the key factors side by side to support your clinical decision-making.
| Factor | Evidence-Based Approach | Traditional Approach |
|---|---|---|
| Initial Assessment | Punitive PIP: Assessment consists of documenting the problem behavior — what went wrong, how often, and with what consequences — without analyzing the environmental variables maintaining it | Functional PIP: Assessment uses tools like the PDC-HS to identify whether the problem is caused by task clarification deficits, equipment barriers, training gaps, or consequence problems — each requiring different interventions |
| Intervention Design | Punitive PIP: Interventions are primarily consequence-based for the staff member — performance thresholds, documentation of failures, escalation to termination — regardless of the function of the performance problem | Functional PIP: Interventions are function-matched — environmental restructuring, targeted BST, consequence modification, or ACT-consistent skills support, depending on what the assessment revealed |
| Staff Engagement | Punitive PIP: Staff member is recipient of a document that specifies what will happen if performance does not improve; involvement in problem analysis is minimal | Functional PIP: Staff member participates in identifying barriers, setting goals linked to personal values, and monitoring progress — which increases both accuracy of the analysis and commitment to the plan |
| Behavior Change Mechanisms | Punitive PIP: Relies primarily on aversive control — the threat of termination functions as an EO for compliance; behavior change may occur but is typically maintained only while the aversive contingency is active | Functional PIP: Relies on reinforcement of target behaviors, environmental modification to support correct performance, and skills training where needed — producing more durable change that does not require constant aversive monitoring |
| Impact on Supervisory Relationship | Punitive PIP: Typically damages the supervisory relationship — staff members who receive punitive PIPs are more likely to reduce transparency, seek employment elsewhere, and approach supervision with avoidance | Functional PIP: Can strengthen the supervisory relationship when the supervisor approaches the process as a problem-solver rather than an arbiter of consequences, and when the PIP includes explicit support resources |
| Organizational Learning | Punitive PIP: Focused on individual accountability; systemic factors that contribute to performance problems are rarely identified or addressed | Functional PIP: Assessment may reveal that performance problems are systemic — inadequate training systems, poor antecedent structures — enabling organizational-level interventions that prevent future problems |
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 empowering staff through pips 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.
Empowering Staff Through PIPs — Kerry Ann Conde · 1 BACB Supervision CEUs · $0
Take This Course →1 BACB Supervision 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.