,
30 tweets,
6 min read
Read on Twitter
Theme of an upcoming post: Rules aren't norms. We break rules constantly, often with few, if any, consequences. Rules are what we *say* we'll do, or what we're *supposed to* do. Norms are what we *actually* do, and when we violate norms there ARE consequences. 1/
What we mean by "norms" is often vaguely defined. Here's a useful definition: "Informal social regularities that individuals feel obligated to follow because of an internalized sense of duty, because of a fear of external non-legal sanctions, or both." ~Richard McAdams, 1997 2/
From "The Origin, Development and Regulation of Norms," Michigan Law Review 3/
Most overt processes aimed at influencing behavior in organizations address RULES. This is why these exercises feel futile--we know there are usually few consequences for breaking a rule. The key is understanding how to address NORMS--which is really hard work. 4//
"The initial force behind norm creation is the desire individuals have for respect or prestige, that is, for the relative esteem of others..." ~McAdams 5/
"Dynamic forces can cause the weak desire for esteem to produce powerful norms, sometimes because individuals struggle to avoid deviance, sometimes because they compete to be heroic." ~McAdams 6/
"Law and norms are alternative means of social control, each providing a mechanism for overcoming pervasive problems of collective action." ~McAdams 7/
"Collective action problems arise when there is a disparity between the individual behavior that maximizes the welfare of the group and the behavior that maximizes the welfare of an individual in the group." ~McAdams 8/
The interplay between norms and law (i.e. rules) is fascinating. For example, seat belt laws "ambiguated" the meaning of putting on a seat belt. Before seat belt laws (and I'm old enough to remember this), it meant, "I don't trust you as a driver," which violated a powerful norm. 
"Although law may affect the strength of norm enforcement, norms are enforced by some means other than legal sanctions." ~McAdams 10/
"Intentional regularity or 'convention' is not an obligation and not, in my use of the term, a norm." ~McAdams. A subtle but important point: Only behavior motivated by A) a sense of duty or B) fear of sanction has the power of a norm. 11/
"Norm internalization evolves much more easily and has much larger effects on behavior if groups promote peer punishment of free riders. Promoting only participation in collective actions is not effective." ~Gavrilets & Richerson, 2017
Of course, this is a function of culture, which we can view along two axes: accountability and empathy. High-accountability cultures punish norm violations, low-accountability cultures do not. The gold standard is a high-accountability, high-empathy culture. 13/
One of the very best cultures I've ever been a part of was my high school track team. High accountability, high empathy. Powerful pro-social norms. We made each other better, we had fun together, we won a lot of races, and we lost some heartbreakers. Very grateful for that. 14/
"For individuals who have strongly internalized a norm, violating it is psychologically painful even if the direct material benefits for the violation are positive." ~Gavrilets & Richerson. We may feel *guilty* if we break a rule for our own benefit, but we don't feel *pain*. 15/
Recall McAdams' emphasis on the necessity of mutual esteem in a group for norm formation. This need not be a strong force--a weak preference for others' esteem can result in powerful norms--but it has to be there. No mutual esteem, no meaningful norms--just rules. 16/
THIS is why relationship-building on a team is so important, and why leaders who dismiss it as fluffy bullshit are missing a huge opportunity to cultivate pro-social, productive norms. It's not about "liking each other"--it's about the power of mutual esteem. 17/
And this is why empathy matters just as much as accountability. I'm reminded of this: edbatista.com/2013/01/leadin… 18/
"The good ones are passionate, but it's not quite love. The very good ones do feel love--for their team, for the work, for life--but they can't quite bring themselves to say it out loud and fully express the feeling. The great ones feel it, and everyone around them knows it." 19/
Back to Gavrilets & Richerson: "Internalizing a norm has two significant effects upon human behavior: People who have internalized a norm follow it even when doing so is personally costly, and they will tend to criticize or punish norm violators." 20/
"Norm internalization is an elaboration of imitation and imprinting found in various species of birds and mammals. Plausibly, then, a propensity to follow norms is at least partly an innate feature of our social psychology." ~Gavrilets & Richerson 21/
Which brings this to mind: "We are not only gregarious animals, liking to be in sight of our fellows, but we have an innate propensity to get ourselves noticed, and noticed favorably, by our kind." ~William James, The Principles of Psychology, 1890. 22/
Connect this back to McAdams' esteem theory: "The initial force behind norm creation is the desire individuals have for respect or prestige, that is, for the relative esteem of others." We're deeply social beings, keenly sensitive to the "relative esteem" we hold in a group. 23/
"Identifying free riders requires the individual to pay additional costs of monitoring the group. The costs of monitoring and punishing others, and being punished by them, increase linearly with group size." ~Gavrilets & Richerson. (This is why large meetings are shitshows.) 24/
[Among other reasons,] "people behave prosocially because they duly follow or are strongly affected by an internalized social norm... Internalized norms can under some conditions trump material payoff considerations in human decision making." ~Gavrilets & Richerson 25/
"Promoting costly punishment of free riders is more efficient in causing norm internalization than promoting production." ~Gavrilets & Richerson. THIS IS KEY. Low-accountability culture = reluctant to punish violators by withholding esteem = hard to develop pro-social norms. 26/
"The extent of norm internalization depends on various parameters including the benefits, costs, group size, and intensity of between-group competition." ~Gavrilets & Richerson. Thus the value of a little rivalry, with competitors and internally: edbatista.com/2018/07/startu…
Learned a ton from this paper: "Collective action and the evolution of social norm internalization" pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.107…. Thank you @seregavr and @pjricherson 28/
Back to culture: Sometimes a leader tries to create a "high-accountability culture" by being a hardass--but that doesn't lead to internalized pro-social norms. Threats evoke compliance as long as people consent to being policed--but that's a VERY different state of affairs. 29/
@threadreaderapp Unroll
