Confidence Games

If you want to get someone to stop doing something, threaten them. If you want to get someone to achieve something big, reward them. If you want them to keep improving, build their confidence.

Enforcement programs usually rely on threats of punishment to achieve compliance. This usually achieves results only in the short term. People will generally do just enough to avoid negative consequences but not enough to guarantee positive results.

Sustained compliance requires incentives. People will do more when the result benefits them or others they consider important or upon whose esteem they depend. Whether compliance becomes a commitment or better yet a genuine cultural shift depends to a great extent on whether the benefits they receive take the form of a one-off or a sustained return on their effort. 

Returns on investment, even when the are realized in the form of a sustained reduction in operating costs, do not generally become self-reinforcing rewards. They may inspire the initial decision to invest and may even provoke further innovation, but they usually won't keep people motivated beyond the realization of the initial goal.

So, how then do we achieve a sustained commitment to compliance? The answer lies in confidence.

If I am confident something bad will happen if I keep doing something wrong or stop doing the right thing, I will change my behavior. If I am confident my decisions and actions will be recognized by repeated rewards, I will demonstrate a consistent commitment to achieving the goals that lead to these rewards. The only thing required then to sustain progress is the attention of others.

Now, who pays attention has important implications too. Clearly, we value the opinions of those who possess authority or power over us -- bosses and enforcement officials included. Sadly, though, their negative opinions threaten our confidence and esteem much more easily than they build it up. The recognition of authorities and superiors of our positive actions matters, but we invariably pay much more attention to their lack of attention or negative attention than anything positive they have to say about our performance.

So, whose opinion matters if leaders and regulators have such little influence over our actions? Simple. Our peers, customers, and subordinates: the people who depend on us. We depend on those who depend on us.

The attitudes and affections of those with whom we interact the most play a powerful role in how we interpret our person and place. They give meaning to who we are and how we see ourselves. When they see us as someone who delivers, we deliver better. When they see us as decisive, we find it easier to make tough decisions. When they are with us in action, we act with greater purpose, intensity, and stamina. 

What then does this say about traditional approaches to enforcement and compliance? For starters, it says we can't ignore the short game if we want to win the long game. But it also says that winning the long game requires us to play many short games. The more consistently the challenges of the short game require those engaged in compliance to exert efforts that require cooperation, the easier it is to build their confidence that sustained commitment is its own reward.