The Universal Law of Behavior: Remembering What We Reward and Punish

In the realm of human behavior, there’s a fundamental principle so simple that even ants understand it, yet so profound that forgetting it can lead to the downfall of complex systems: “What you reward you get more of. What you punish you get less of.”

This principle, rooted in B.F. Skinner’s concept of operant conditioning, governs behavior across all levels of complexity. From ants following pheromone trails to global economic policies, the basic truth remains: behaviors followed by positive consequences are repeated, while those followed by negative consequences are avoided.

However, as we scale up from individual interactions to societal structures, this principle is often overlooked, leading to unintended and sometimes disastrous consequences. Let’s explore its manifestations in various domains and the dangers of forgetting it.

Economics and Taxation

This doesn’t mean we shouldn’t tax income, but it underscores the importance of carefully designed tax systems that balance revenue generation with economic growth incentives. Policymakers must constantly ask: “What behaviors are we inadvertently punishing or rewarding?”

Workplace Management

In organizational settings, the principle manifests in employee empowerment. When we reward responsibility by giving employees autonomy, they often rise to the challenge. “When you give employees responsibility, they start behaving responsibly.”

Empowering employees with goals rather than strict paths and tasks often leads to innovation, increased productivity, and higher job satisfaction. Conversely, micromanagement — a form of punishment — typically results in decreased motivation and productivity.

Academia and Publishing: When Bad Rewards Meet AI

The academic world offers a cautionary tale of a flawed reward system that functioned for years until artificial intelligence (Generative AI) threw its shortcomings into sharp relief.

For decades, researchers have been primarily rewarded based on the quantity of publications and citations they accumulate. This “publish or perish” culture, while problematic, maintained a tenuous balance in the academic ecosystem. The introduction of the Open Access (OA) model, which shifted costs from readers to authors through publication fees, added new complexities but didn’t fundamentally break the system.

However, the rise of AI has lit a powder keg under this already unstable structure:

1. Quantity Over Quality: The long-standing emphasis on publication numbers has exploded with AI’s ability to generate vast amounts of content quickly.
2. Peer Review Strain: The flood of AI-generated papers has overwhelmed the peer review system, which was already struggling with increasing submission volumes.
3. Falsified Data: AI can create convincing but entirely fabricated datasets, challenging the foundations of empirical research.
4. Plagiarism and Recycling: AI’s capacity to rephrase and combine existing works has made detecting academic dishonesty far more difficult.
5. Predatory Practices Amplified: Predatory journals and Papermills, which have long exploited the reward system, can now use GAI to generate entire issues of low-quality or nonsensical papers.

This situation starkly illustrates our principle: the academic world has long rewarded quantity of output, and now, with AI, it’s getting more of it—far more than the system can handle or verify.

The AI revolution in academia serves as a stark reminder of the dangers of misaligned incentives. It shows how a reward system that produces acceptable results in one technological context can rapidly become dysfunctional when new tools enter the picture.

Empowerment, KPIs, and Intelligent Product Design

The principle “What you reward you get more of. What you punish you get less of” finds perhaps its most positive expression in the realm of product management and design. Here, understanding and applying this concept can lead to transformative results.

Empowerment stands at the forefront of this application. When we reward initiative and responsibility by giving team members autonomy, we often see a flourishing of creativity and dedication. This is the principle in action: by rewarding trust with trust, we get more trustworthy behavior.

Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) serve as the practical embodiment of our rewards system in product development. Choosing the right KPIs is therefore crucial. If we reward merely the number of features shipped, we may end up with a bloated, unfocused product. But if we reward user satisfaction, problem resolution, or meaningful engagement, we’re far more likely to end up with a product that truly serves its purpose.

Intelligent product design, then, becomes an exercise in aligning our reward structures (as expressed through KPIs and team culture) with our ultimate goals. It requires us to constantly ask: Are we incentivizing the behaviors and outcomes that will lead to a successful, user-centric product? Are we empowering our team to make decisions that align with these goals?

By keeping this fundamental principle in mind throughout the product development process, we can create environments where innovation thrives, users’ needs are met, and team members feel valued and motivated. We can design products that not only function well but evolve in response to real-world use and feedback.

In essence, the principle reminds us that in product design, as in all areas of life, we shape our outcomes through the behaviors we choose to reward. By thoughtfully applying this understanding, we can create products, teams, and systems that are not just effective today, but adaptable and resilient for the challenges of tomorrow.