In business, figurative sticks and stones may break no bones, but a few kind words can really help you.
Where there’s no profit, there’s ultimately no business. Therefore, businesses need to influence their employees’ behaviour in such a way that it contributes to profitability.
At Achievement Awards Group, our role is to help businesses do just that. And although part of “what we do” is employee engagement (among other) programs, in a way that is the wrapping for our real expertise, which is behaviour change. Or, to put a finer point on it, profitable behaviour change.
But we like to take it further, and commit to positive behaviour change. Which means we try to be very intentional and deliberate about things. Because not all profitable behaviour change is positive. There are also other ways of changing behaviour that may still be profitable, but which may be considered negative.
Positive behaviour change is, therefore, a choice. Arguably an ethical or emotional one. But, ultimately, we believe it’s also, simply, the better performance choice.
Positive about positive behaviour change
What is positive behaviour change? Distilled to its essence, we think of it simply as that which improves two things: people’s lives, and business results.
Other articulations go further, encompassing all of individual, interpersonal, organisational and social wellbeing. That sounds rather appealing, perhaps even a little Utopian, but isn’t off the mark. Wellbeing at work has positive implications elsewhere.
It makes common sense: if work is pleasant and meaningful to an individual, she is going to have more harmonious relationships with her colleagues and will be more inclined to help them, as they will her; she will go home in a better mood, interact more positively with her family, who will in turn do the same with their friends and extended communities. She may excel in her work, earn more, and pay more tax, thus contributing to a more prosperous country.
Other positive knock-on effects happen at the organisational level: the business, with happier and more productive employees, is – objectively – likely to experience less absenteeism and staff turnover, while also seeing better work quality1. It will likely grow to be more profitable, able to hire more people, offer more internships and better benefits, in turn attracting more outstanding people… and so the circle continues.
Is negative always a no-no?
If positive behaviour change improves business results and people’s lives, then I suggest that negative behaviour change is that which worsens either business results or people’s lives, or both.
Some examples of undesirable business consequences of behaviour change include:
- Misaligned or unintended actions (e.g. competition or tension between colleagues where collaboration and teamwork are important; or rewarding speed at the expense of quality).
- Apparent short-term wins at the expense of long-term sustainability (e.g. hiring a “superstar” manager who disrupts a cohesive culture and negatively impacts the team’s performance).
- Reducing intrinsic or extrinsic motivation (e.g. by reducing autonomy, development opportunities or rewards).
- Unintentionally encouraging unethical or irresponsible behaviour (e.g. through fierce competition or pressure to achieve targets).
- Cannibalising existing positive behaviours (e.g. autonomy replaced by micro-management; or psychological safety replaced by fear).
- Undermining the company purpose, mission or values.
- Lower profit.
And what about behaviours that worsen people lives? Consider, instead of positive carrots, some negative sticks. For example, workers in a factory, penalised for not meeting production targets, or made to work longer hours or given shorter breaks. Or, treating people disrespectfully, or making them anxious or fearful.
It’s worth noting that some of these negative individual consequences may still contribute to a business’s profitability. More workers working longer hours may, indeed, increase a factory’s output. People driven by fear may, indeed, get the job done quicker.
It’s also worth noting that what may be considered negative behaviour change is sometimes subjective. What one person considers punitive, another may consider motivating. Think about factory workers who are incentivised to increase output by working longer hours, and are rewarded for it. Or a work environment that is highly competitive, and where 60-hour work weeks are the norm, or even encouraged. In both examples, employees may become more stressed or unhealthy, and spend less time with their families. But if they’re given a choice, is it still negative?
This is, perhaps, a grey area, because the individuals may not necessarily experience their lives as being worse, and the business may be seeing better results.
Why a preference for positive?
If what some consider to be negative behaviour change can still have positive business outcomes, is that really such a bad thing – at least as far as the business is concerned?
Every business has its own culture, and there is an argument to be made for honesty and transparency: “Here, you will work harder than you’ve ever worked anywhere else, but you will get better experience/make more money/accelerate your career faster than anywhere else.” People know what they’re in for and what to expect.
But there are at least two solid arguments against it.
One is that an environment which encourages positive behaviour change is simply more humanistic, and more akin to what most people want to see in the world.
At the beginning of this millennium, famed psychologists Martin Seligman and Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi wrote about positive psychology in America, but what they said is equally applicable at an organisational level (I have substituted “America” with “business”):
“Entering a new millennium, [business] can continue to increase its material wealth while ignoring the human needs of its people…. Psychology should be able to help document… what work settings support the greatest satisfaction among workers… and how people’s lives can be most worth living… The field of positive psychology at the subjective level is about valued subjective experiences: well-being, contentment, and satisfaction (in the past); hope and optimism (for the future); and flow and happiness (in the present).2
If you share this view of the world – and I suspect most readers will – then you will naturally be drawn toward positive and away from negative behaviour change at work, where we spend most of our waking hours.
The second argument for positive behaviour change – which will compel even the hardest and most profit-driven business owners – is that getting the most out of employees is not necessarily getting the best out of them.
They may be more productive, but the quality of their work may deteriorate. And the increase in output may not be sustainable. After all, how long will over-worked or disrespected employees remain motivated? How long will they want to stay with the company?
Disengaged employees are also disinclined to give any “discretionary energy” to their employers. They will not go above and beyond what is expected of them. In contrast, simple acts of recognition go a long way. In a study called “Getting more work for nothing”, students “were offered a congratulatory card honoring the best performance. The award was purely symbolic to ensure that any behavioral effect is driven by non-material benefits. Our results show that the award increases performance by about 12 percent on average.” 3
Then there are other risks, mentioned earlier, such as the undermining of company values, reduction of team cohesion and alignment, and the negative impact on motivation. When the desired behaviours are negative, these risks are multiplied.
And so positive behaviour change is not just “nice,” it’s also more effective.
How to promote positive behaviour change?
In the context of the argument for positive behaviour change, it’s surprising that “employee engagement in the U.S. fell to its lowest level in a decade in 2024, with only 31% of employees engaged.” 4
Which begs the question: how do companies engage their employees so as to positively change their behaviour?
There are, of course, many answers to that question. But I want to focus on just one: recognition.
The simple act of recognising people for the behaviours you want to see in your company is not just easy, it also goes a long way – perhaps even further than financial rewards. One study, which gave employees either monetary rewards (either privately or publicly) or social rewards, found that “in both the short and long term, public rewards outperformed private rewards, and social rewards outperformed monetary rewards.” 5
This is not to dismiss financial rewards – they can be very effective, and add substantial layers of motivation and engagement. It is, rather, to highlight how effective it can be to say a simple “well done” in front of everyone (whether that’s in a team meeting or on a recognition platform).
This makes sense in the context of the 4-Drive Theory of Motivation, which suggests that there are four main drives that motivate employees. They are:
- The drive to acquire – from money to skills to status
- The drive to bond – to form relationships with colleagues, and to feel a sense of belonging
- The drive to comprehend – to satisfy curiosity, to discover and understand
- The drive to defend – to feel safe and secure, to protect what is held dear
As the Incentive Research Foundation has observed: “In a single instance of giving an employee a reward or recognition, the organization allows an employee to acquire status… to bond with their team or the person giving the recognition, to more deeply comprehend what is important to the organization, and to defend the very deeply held belief that he or she is good at what they do and has chosen the right organization for employment.” 6
In other words, satisfying any one of the four drives is positive. But satisfying all four – such as through recognition or rewards, has a powerfully compounding effect.
The better bottom line
The human moral of the story is that positive behaviour change is better for individuals, and reflects a kinder, more humane world view. But the business conclusion is that it usually yields better results, and that is hard to argue against.
