Drivers of Behavior: SCARF
SCARF is a theory introduced in 2008 by David Rock, in his paper "SCARF: A Brain-Based Model for Collaborating With and Influencing Others" which suggests five domains that impact behavior. Dr. Rock presents SCARF as a means to collaborate with and influence others.
Additionally, understanding the drivers of behavior can help to build understanding and empathy toward your own reactions as well as the reactions of others.
Rock cites two themes from social neuroscience in creating SCARF. The first is from Dr. Evian Gordon “much of our motivation driving social behavior is governed by an overarching organizing principle of minimizing threat and maximizing reward.”
The second is from Eisenberger and Lieberman sharing that “several domains of social experience draw upon the same brain networks to maximize reward and minimize threat as the brain networks used for primary survival needs.”
From this Rock presents five domains of human social experience:
Status- the relative importance to others
Certainty- being able to predict the future
Autonomy- a sense of control
Relatedness- a sense of safety with others (belonging)
Fairness- a perception of fair-exchanges
Status
Our relative importance to others helps us define our place in the social hierarchy. Reactions to a sense of status being threatened have been studied in everything from being removed from a project or demoted, to receiving unsolicited advice and a suggestion that someone is ineffective in a task. To reduce the sense of threat to status, leaders should allow for self-assessment and conversation and critique being driven by the individual.
A status reward is more obvious in the organization from promotion to recognition and opportunity.
Certainty
The need for certainty is based on the brain’s reliance on pattern recognition. Inconsistencies in behavior or withholding information can trigger a sense of uncertainty.
Creating a sense of certainty is based on creating reliable patterns. Aligning on expectations and goals and then being able to meet those expectations drives patterns of certainty. Telling someone what to expect or what you are going to do and then following through triggers certainty.
Tools to set expectations, deliver feedback, manage performance and even present information are built to increase certainty and predictability.
Autonomy
Autonomy or control, even the perception of control, can create a feeling of reward. A lack of agency or ability to influence others on the other hand can cause a strong sense of threat.
Teams increase certainty, status, and relatedness often offsetting some of our need for autonomy in favor of team collaboration.
Providing opportunities for self-direction, autonomy over workspace and workflows, and clear space to be creative and make decisions can add to a sense of autonomy, especially when total autonomy isn’t possible.
Relatedness
Relatedness is similar to feeling a sense of belonging or social safety and trust. Feeling safe in a group. Strangers or a lack of alignment or shared values with a group can trigger a feeling of threat to our sense of relatedness.
Creating opportunities to connect and get to know each other, to find common ground, especially on distributed and diverse teams is very important to support relatedness.
The social anxiety around networking events, especially regarding networking with new people stems from a feeling of a threat to our sense of relatedness. Consider how to drive safe connections through mentorship or buddy systems and small groups.
Fairness
Fairness is pretty clear– a perception of fairness increases our perception of reward and anything seemingly unfair triggers a sense of threat.
Transparent, clear communication and expectations help to reduce the threat around fairness. Self-direction can also support fairness.
A perceived threat or opportunity for reward within these five domains impacts how people behave or respond to situations.
Managers and leaders should keep these in mind to better understand their own as well as their employees’ reactions to help them consider the best strategy to approach different situations.
Sources
Rock, D. (2008). SCARF: A Brain-Based Model for Collaborating With & Influencing Others. NeuroLeadership Journal, (1) 44-52.
Gordon, E. (2000). Integrative Neuroscience: Bringing together biological, psychological and clinical models of the human brain. Singapore: Harwood Academic Publishers.
Eisenberger, N. I., Lieberman, M. D., & Williams, K. D. (2003). Does rejection hurt? An fMRI study of social exclusion. Science, 302, 290-292.
