- Dave Keats
- Brantford, Ontario
This conversation is closed.
Should corporations have "Behavioural Science" departments?
In Mr. Pink's talk, he makes two points that I believe are especially important. First, that monetary incentives are actually counterproductive when applied to tasks requiring cognitive abilities (studied and proven). And second, that science knows more than business is doing.
If both of these things are true, then why not bring behavioural science to businesses? Companies are already quite good at accessing the “hard sciences” via their employees – things like engineering, chemistry, physics, mathematics, etc. So, why not do the same thing with the “soft sciences” - psychology, sociology, and related sciences of human behaviour?
Since science knows more than business is doing, it appears that Human Resource departments are not filling the need for additional knowledge of human behaviour. Behavioural Science departments could provide companies with continued access to the “soft sciences” - and the associated benefits.
Such departments would certainly cost more. But, are they also worth more? There might be value in the ability to study employees' responses to corporate culture, etc., and make changes to benefit the company and the employees. This might more than pay for the cost the additional department.