Posted by Jim McKinley on May 03, 1998 at 22:30:52:

In Reply to: Re: Extrinsic vs. Intrinsic Rewards for Performance posted by steve gordon on April 27, 1998 at 09:42:33:

Steve,

Here is an article on your requested topic:

----

Behavioristic Windsurfing

The previous article presented an innovative approach to Sport Fleet racing, designed to attract novices to the world of competition and maximize the fun and
learning factors. This article looks behind the scenes to the learning theory that supports the Sport Fleet Cooperative Competition concept.

Introduction

Competition may be either "antagonistic" or "cooperative". Most competition today is antagonistic, some more and some less. Windsurfing events are certainly more
benign than boxing, football or ice hockey but nevertheless, are still antagonistic. Cooperative competition emphasizes the fun and learning factors with top
performers sharing their knowledge and skills with the other competitors. Antagonistic competition stresses high performance and extrinsic motivation with winners
often guarding equipment and technique differences which helped them achieve top honors.

Antagonistic competition will probably be with us for a long time to come. Cooperative competition is a concept whose time has come. Our goal is to see all
windsurfing competition, whether it be antagonistic or cooperative, become standardized throughout the world in terms of safety, fun and fairness. While many Race
Committees have evolved competition and scoring formats which allow for fun and fair events, there are many who haven't. They continue to do the best they can
with the awareness they have; it's just too bad they don't have more awareness! We hope RaceManPro can somehow make a difference!

We think it's time to introduce and promote the cooperative competition concept for the Sport Fleet. After all, the Sport Fleet is a natural with its stated goals of
"being less competitive on shorter courses". At the same time, we hope to see antagonistic competition evolve toward higher levels of fun and fairness and perhaps,
in time, take on some of the qualities of cooperative competition (like the workshops where top performers share their secrets with the other competitors after the
event). We're not out to change the world overnight but we are out to change the world!

Is antagonism in competition one reason more windsurfers don't participate in competitive events?

During the three years I was Race Director for H.A.W.A.I.I. on Oahu, I asked a lot of recreational windsurfers why they didn't compete. I heard lots of different
answers but one of the most common was, "I'm not into racing; I just windsurf for fun". Yet, every day they sailed, these people were out racing their friends and
having a great time. So, "WHY is informal racing fun and formal racing no fun, yet, both informal and formal racers have fun?" The followup question is, "WHAT can
we do to attract more windsurfers into competition and to make events more fun or at least appear more fun?"

Let's not take the last question first. That's often how we do things, that is, we ask WHY, then WHAT; lacking real answers to WHY, then we work on the WHAT.
This time, let's try to answer the WHY question.

Is windsurfing "Behavioristic"?

Think back to your family, your school, your job, and then windsurfing. Is there anything in common with all of these?

Parents: "Be good and I'll fix you desert".

Teachers: "Do well on the test and I'll give you an A".

Boss: "You do good and we'll give you a raise".

Race Director: "Be in the top five and you'll get a trophy".

A while back some friends introduced me to Alfie Kohn's book, Punished by Rewards: the Trouble with Gold Stars, Incentive Plans, A's, Praise and other Bribes. I
read it and I'll have to admit, I had to change my thinking! The chapter on "Pop Behaviorism" reminded me of my "Theories of Education" class at U.C.L.A. where
we were introduced to Edward Thorndike (who in 1898 promoted the "Law of Effect: behavior leading to a positive consequence will be repeated"); John B.
Watson (who became known as the "Father of Behaviorism" and B.F. Skinner (who, as Kohn succinctly points out, conducted most of his experiments on rodents
and pigeons but wrote most of his books about people). It's amazing to me their theories of learning still permeate our society from the cradle to the grave and
continue to form the basis for most parenting, education, management...and competition in sports!

Several years ago someone introduced me to a new scoring system: "Start the race and you'll get a bonus point; finish it and you'll get another; beat as many boards
as you can and get a point for each one you beat". This is an example of "Pop Behaviorism". Right now you might be asking, "What's wrong with bonus points?"
Well, nothing if you happen to think gold stars, incentive plans, A's, praise and other brides are O.K. too!

I'd like to share with you some thoughts from Alfie Kohn's book that appealed to me and relate them to windsurfing competition:

"Educators opposed to 'Pop Behaviorism' cite learning theory research which suggests that the most destructive way to use extrinsic motivators is to offer them for
doing something that is potentially interesting in its own right." Is starting a race, finishing and beating other competitors exciting, challenging and fun OR dull, boring
and a waste of time? If racing is indeed exciting, challenging and fun, then why have extrinsic motivators like bonus points, ranking and trophies?

"Rewards must be judged on whether they lead to lasting change---change that persists when there are no longer rewards to be gained. Research indicates that
rewards usually improve performance only at extremely simpleminded, indeed, mindless tasks and even then they improve only quantitative performance, not
qualitative." I think we all agree that racing isn't mindless! What's mindless is our thinking that we need extrinsic motivators!

"Anything presented as a prerequisite for something else---that is, as a means toward some other end---comes over time to be seen as less desirable." Thus, Start
the race and you'll get a bonus point automatically devalues the act of starting the race. And, Finish the race and you'll get another bonus point automatically devalues
the act of finishing the race. Finally, Pass as many boards as you can and get a bonus point for every board you beat automatically devalues the act of beating the
other boards.

"Rewards are usually experienced as controlling and people tend to recoil from situations where their autonomy has been diminished. If they continue in the activity,
it's really due to their pleasure of the activity, not the pleasure derived from receiving rewards." It seems to me that most amateur competitors derive far more
pleasure from their time on the water than their brief time on the platform receiving their trophy. After all, what can you do with a trophy? I mean, you can't sell them
or trade them for new equipment or even give them away! You can't even recycle them!

"Human beings are born with a natural curiosity about their world and their ability to achieve what they can in it." Windsurfers too have a natural curiosity about their
world of water and wind and their ability to achieve what they can with it. Most are inclined to explore it without extrinsic inducement. If windsurfers happen to get
into competition, they gradually learn to function on a reward system. Maybe our goal should be to involve novices in a form of competition that prioritizes fun and
learning and promotes the intrinsic value systems!

Someone suggested once that racers are motivated by watching one of their peers receive a reward. However, "Evidence from the field of non-behavioristic
education, suggests that extrinsic motivators are more likely to demotivate and that losing in a competition due to having not received as many rewards could be even
worse." Wonder how many people we've lost due to demotivation?

"We're tempted to take shortcuts and to manipulate behavior with the use of rewards, instead of explaining, helping people develop needed skills, fostering a
commitment to good values, and bringing people in on the process of deciding how to learn and improve skills." This is the crux of the issue! We might think we don't
have the time to do it right but when you come right down to it, do we really have any choice?

"Competitors who are led to think about how well they are doing---or even worse, how well they doing compared to everyone else---are less likely to do well. This
strategy chips away at intrinsic motivation. The 'How ja do?' preoccupation of competitors, compulsively comparing their own performance to others, is not a
function of human nature but of the performance orientation that is prevalent among competitive events, which in the long term, stifles a competitor's interest in what
they should be learning and any intrinsic motivation they may have left." Wow! If this is true, and I think it is, we'd better do something about it as soon as possible!
Anyone interested in a year of competition without extrinsic motivators? Anyone want to work instead on doing everything we can to put these things out of people's
minds? Anyone ready to, as Alfie Kohn says, "unhook the task from the compensation"?

"Motivation to compete is typically highest when the competition offers an opportunity to learn new skills, to experience some variation in task, and to acquire and
demonstrate competence. (Racers) are motivated by their own inherent need to succeed at a challenging task. Our job is not to motivate but to provide opportunities
for racers to achieve so they will become motivated." More words of wisdom! I think the time has come to THINK, to FOLLOW A DECISION TO ITS
LOGICAL END and to HAVE A GOOD REASON FOR WHAT WE DO!

"If you must offer rewards, then at least:

1.offer fewer of them or make each one smaller, give them out privately and avoid making a big fuss over the whole process.

2.offer rewards after the fact, as a surprise

3.make rewards available to anyone who meets a given standard instead of making each person an obstacle to the other's success

4.make rewards as similar as possible to the task

5.give racers as much choice as possible about how rewards are used

6.try to immunize individuals against the motivation killing effect of rewards"

Returning now to our questions WHY and WHAT...

WHY is informal racing fun and formal racing no fun, yet, both informal and formal racers have fun? Informal and formal racing is fun because it appeals to the
intrinsic need we all have to master our world of water and wind and to become the very best we can be given our physical and mental capabilities.

WHY is formal racing perceived as no fun? The perception that formal racing is no fun is probably just a coverup for the fear of failure.

WHAT can we do to motivate people to participate in formal competitive events?

First, take steps to minimize the fear factor.

Second, prioritize the fun and learning factors.

Third, offer a workshop immediately following the event so top performers can share their secrets with the other competitors.

Only time can tell...

Cooperative Competition's unique scoring system is based on elapsed time on the course (rather than finishing place) and a comparison of the racer's average time
vs. the group average time. The formula determines lower and upper control limits to see which racers, if any, were top performers. The scoring system can separate
competitors into three groups: 1) Top Performers; 2) Competitors and 3) Those Needing a Lot of Improvement.

If all competitors fall within a range of equivalent times wherein the variation in average time can be attributed to factors inherent in the system (not enough or too
much wind, too small or too large a board, too small or too large a sail, wrong fin, bad start, interference at the start or a mark, dehydration, malnutrition, or
whatever) instead of the people, then everyone is just a "Competitor". No one can distinguish themselves as a "winner" (having overcome the factors inherent in the
system) or "someone needing a lot of improvement" (someone totally a victim of the factors inherent in the system).

Don't look now but, traditional scoring practices (i.e. the sum total of finishing places) can only determine who crossed the line first and who did it most often. It
could desiginate a competitor "winner" whose total elapsed time for all races was actually greater than that of a loser (i.e. anyone who didn't win). Moreover, you
might arbitrarily award trophies to the top five or ten, regardless of whether they qualified as top performers or not!

Thus, antagonistic windsurfing competition is flawed not only by a highly questionable emphasis on extrinsic motivators but a faulty basic scoring premise as well,
namely, that by totaling finishing places you can accurately determine who the top performers are. Well, maybe you can and maybe you can't! When you come right
down to it,

Only time can tell!

I urge you to get Alfie Kohn's book and read it. I think the man's got some worthwhile answers! Meanwhile, I hope this article has provided you some food for
thought! Why not introduce and promote the cooperative competition concept for your Sport Fleet? It can coexist right along with your antagonistic competition, no
problem! Then, just think about ways you can help your antagonistic competition program evolve toward higher levels of fun and fairness. Consider the possibilities
of adapting some of the qualities of cooperative competition to your other events (like the workshops or a ranking cutoff point, etc.). Like we said in the beginning,
we're not out to change the world overnight but we are out to change the world...and we'd like you to help us!

Questions? Contact John Twelker by e-mail at jtwelker@maui.net

---

Follow Ups:

---

Click Here to Post Follow Up in New Forums

    Knowledge Management Think Tank (New)

  

 Subject: 

Message: