Leaders should see themselves as behaviour setting architects not behaviour instructors

When people do something, they do something somewhere. Behaviour always has a setting and leaders can better align behaviours of teams by curating the environment and here's how.

When people do something, they do something somewhere. Behaviour always has a setting and as we explored in the first blog, Lewin’s equation of (B) Behaviour being a (f) function of (P) Person and (E) Environment informs us that person and environment are interdependent. If you want to understand behaviour you cannot separate the person from the environment. This deconstruction of a problem is commonplace and a hangover of the industrial revolution and mechanisation of work 100 years ago. It is woven into our environment with statements such as “lets break this problem down” or “How do you eat an Elephant?”. Behaviour is a complex dynamic system that cannot be reduced down to its component parts (e.g. just the person), optimised independent of the environment and then re-introduced to it. Just think about how successful leadership training was in the those square white box rooms. Behaviour is more than the sum of the person & their environment.

As a manager, you may have wondered why some of your team members behave differently in different situations. For example, why does Joe, who is usually innovative and creative in their design work, become conservative and risk-averse in their documentation work? Why does Mary, who is normally collaborative and supportive at work, become competitive and defensive at a review meeting? Why does Sam, who is always meticulous and thorough in their testing work, become sloppy and careless in their maintenance work?

The answer to these questions may lie in the concept of behaviour setting theory, a theory that describes the relationship between human behaviour and the social environment. It was proposed by Roger Barker, a psychologist who studied the behaviour of everyday people in everyday settings in a town in Kansas for 25 years. Barker observed that the behaviour of different individuals varied less within specific settings than the behaviour of a single individual across many places. In other words, the environment had a stronger influence on behaviour than the individual’s personality, cognition, values or abilities.

A behaviour setting is a stable, regularly occurring place-activity, such as a design workshop, a testing lab or a maintenance site. A behaviour setting has a specific structure and function that determines what behaviours are expected and appropriate for its occupants. For example, a design workshop affords designing and prototyping behaviours, while a testing lab affords testing and debugging behaviours.

Let’s explore the 4 areas you can identify and curate as a leader to align behaviours to the desired goal-

·       The physical environment, which refers to the material objects and natural forces that surround the behaviour setting, such as furniture, tools and even weather. The physical environment can affect the behaviour of the occupants by providing or limiting opportunities for action, which Barker called affordances. Roger Barker & James Gibson talk a lot about affordances and what they refer to as the physical environment is so much more complex and dominant in the world of work in 2023. The amount of systems, tools, interfaces a human has to interact with has grown exponentially. Engineers understand this as Human Factors and UX/UI, but we rarely consider the employee interfaces at work when exploring behavioural change. What are all the different systems, tools, processes and ways of doing things that encourage some behaviours (affordances) or inhibit others (constraints).

·       The social environment, which refers to the other people and groups that interact with the behaviour setting, such as you their manager, family members in their home office settings, colleagues, etc. The social environment can affect the behaviour of the occupants by creating or enforcing norms, rules, roles and expectations. We know, even in high performing single contributor roles such as surgeons who might have higher success rates in different hospitals in the same day (AM vs PM), this variance in performance is reduced when you move surgical teams with them. A high performing team is greater than the sum of its parts.

·       The temporal environment, which refers to the time and duration of the behaviour setting, such as day, night, season, etc. The temporal environment can affect the behaviour of the occupants by creating or changing rhythms, cycles and patterns of activity. An example of this might be the time in a programme, how might behaviour change as a consequence of where a programme or bid is in its cycle?

·       The cultural environment, which refers to the values, beliefs, traditions and customs that influence the behaviour setting, such as religion, ethnicity, nationality, etc. The cultural environment can affect the behaviour of the occupants by shaping or modifying their attitudes, preferences and motivations. Geert Hofstede gave us the cultural onion, which can be viewed only through the practices of the behavioural setting. These are the Symbols, Heroes, Rituals & Values. When you view the practices around your team, what are symbols you see, heroes celebrated, rituals blindly followed and values rewarded. How are these inviting or constraining the desired behaviours?

The key thing here is that each one of these components are interdependent and reinforcing of each other. To illustrate how this works in practice, let’s look at an example of a behaviour setting that you may encounter as a Programme or Engineering Leader: a design workshop for a new electric vehicle embedded in a large automotive company.

This design workshop was organised by Green Motors, a global brand that aimed to develop innovative and sustainable solutions for the future of mobility. The workshop involved several engineers from different disciplines, such as mechanical, electrical, software, etc. The workshop had several interdependent behaviour-milieu parts:

·       The physical environment can affect the behaviour of the occupants by providing or limiting opportunities for action (affordances). For example, the systems and tools that the engineers have to use to design the electric vehicle, such as CAD software, simulation software, prototyping equipment, etc., afford creating, modifying, and testing designs; but they also constrain the design options, parameters, and specifications.

·       The social environment can affect the behaviour of the occupants by creating or enforcing norms, rules, roles and expectations. For example, the bureaucracy of the large automotive company affords security and safety of design by requiring approvals, reviews, and audits; but it also constrains innovation and creativity by imposing delays, restrictions, and standardisation. Are people conforming to these norms and reinforcing this through their verbal and physical expressions, how can you bring more divergent thinking into the team to better balance the team?

·       The temporal environment can affect the behaviour of the occupants by creating or changing rhythms, cycles and patterns of activity. For example, the external market conditions that see the speed to market being key over the quality of the product afford urgency and efficiency of design by creating pressure, competition, and incentives; but they also constrain quality and reliability of design by reducing time, resources, and testing.

·       The cultural environment can affect the behaviour of the occupants by shaping or modifying their attitudes, preferences and motivations. For example, the company culture that values safety over innovation and creativity affords consistency and conformity of design by promoting standards, guidelines, and best practices; but it also constrains diversity and originality of design by discouraging experimentation, variation, and risk-taking.

As a Programme or Engineering Leader of this design workshop (or a similar one), you can use behaviour setting theory to analyse and improve your team performance. For example, you can:

·       Identify the behaviour settings that your team members are part of, such as the design workshop, the testing lab, the maintenance site, by their physical, social, temporal and cultural affordances (invitations to act) or constraints (limiting actions) etc.

·       Evaluate how these behaviour settings influence or constrain your team members’ behaviour, such as their tasks, skills, interactions, feedback, etc.

·       Design or modify these behaviour settings to align them with your project goals, such as developing a high-quality, cost-effective and eco-friendly product.

·       Monitor the effects of these changes on your team members’ behaviour, such as their productivity, quality, creativity and teamwork.

As a leader, see yourself as the architect of the behaviour setting your team operates within. Spend as much time observing the behaviour setting as much as the people within that setting, and only consider behaviour as a function of both the behaviour setting and people operating within that specific environment. By applying behaviour setting theory, you can enhance your team performance by creating a better fit between your team members and their work environment. You can also help your team members adapt to different behaviour settings and cope with changing demands and expectations. 

To help me and those reading explore the application of this, please put in the comments what you think might be the physical, temporal, social and cultural affordances you can manipulate within a behaviour setting you frequently observe as a leader or expert in your area?