Showing posts with label incentives. Show all posts

I Need No Incentive to Write About Paul Hebert (@incentintel) #timsackettday

by Matthew Stollak on Wednesday, January 23, 2013

Last year on this day, the HR community came together to celebrate one of its own - the unheralded, unlistable Tim Sackett.  Some highlights can be found here, here, here, here, and my own contribution here

But, that was last year....

Today, it is all about the great Paul Hebert.


If you do a Google image search of the man, you get a lot of pretenders who have the name "Paul Hebert...." but there is only one who carries the influence and weight of the HR community on his shoulders.


When Commissioner Gordon summons Bruce Wayne to Gotham Police HQ, he sends out something like this:

  

However, when Commissioner Hank Jackson at SHRM needs a particular kind of HR expert, he summons Paul with the "Hebert signal."  Perhaps you've seen it?  

Reflected on the moon, it looks something like this:


When behavior needs to be influenced without rewards, Paul is there....

When there is a gift card to be purchased for an employee, Paul is there....

When an employer wants to offer cash, instead of non-cash awards, Paul is there...

When a drunkard takes a walk, Paul is there....

Like Billy Batson shouts "Shazam" to transform into Captain Marvel, Paul utters "Cialdini" to transform from the mild-mannered Greenville, SC native into HR influence superhero.

So, if you know what is good for you, you'll need no incentive to follow Paul on Twitter at @incentintel, or check out his wonderful blog here (for now).

Happy #timsackettday, Paul! Cialdini!

Sooner Than You Think

by Matthew Stollak on Monday, November 23, 2009

While the fall semester is winding down, I am already thinking and planning for spring semester. One of the classes I will be teaching (and usually do teach) is Statistics for Business and Economics....at 8:00 A.M. Not surprisingly, attendance tends to be a bit problematic. In a class such as statistics, a single absence can often have deleterious effects on grades since much of the material builds on that which was previously taught earlier in the semester.

I typically offer 4 "free" absences to students, regardless of whether they are "excused" or "unexcused." As I don't want to take time to sort out what qualifies as an excused absence, I simply treat them any absence the same. However, once four absences have been used up, each additional absence receives a penalty of -10 points (which equates to 1% of their grade on a 1000 point scale). I often find that once students reach 4 absences (we meet 4 times a week), grades tend to drop precipitously for each additional absence (even absent the 10 point penalty), and so I wanted to make the penalty punitive enough to prevent significant absences. I have found that in the absence of such an attendance policy, it would not be uncommon for students to miss 9 or more classes (I'm not expecting students to be stirred to a standing ovation based on my stunning presentation of the Poisson Distribution, so I do not take absences personally).

With that in mind, I am contemplating switching to a different attendance/absence policy in the Spring. Instead of penalizing students 10 points for each additional absence beyond 4, I am thinking of turning it around and raising the points needed to earn a grade by 10 points per absence. Hence, while it originally took a student 920 points (on a 1000 pt scale) to earn an A, it would be raised to 930 points, an AB would be raised from 880 to 890, and so on, until an F is raised from 600 or lower to 610. If a student missed 8 classes, he or she would now need 960 points to earn an A, compared to the original 920 points.

Will students react positively or negatively to this change? How will it affect student behavior? Are there unintended consequences? Thoughts?