Krisztian Komandi的动态

#4 Only 26 posts to go! OK, it sounds a bit strange - but there is a rationale why such phrasing might work - and organisers of the Budapest half marathon last weekend seemed to know this as well. Originally coined by Clark Hull in the 1930s, the goal gradient hypohesis became popular after a paper by Oleg Urminsky and his colleagues in 2006 (https://lnkd.in/ebvkBm_s). It suggests that the tendency to approach a goal, and the effort expended, increases with the proximity to the goal. The closer we are to the finish line, the harder we work to achieve that line. Dozens of loyalty programs, apps and - see below - sports events leverage this theory, framing progress in terms of how much is left behind. This behavioural science concept, too, can be traced back to present bias. Our cognition is organized in a way that it prioritizes larger rewards and rewards that we're closer to achieving. When you only have one stamp on your loyalty card, that's pretty far away. On the other hand, when you only have two stamps to go, that free coffee is imminent. You could get it really soon. And so, it seems more valuable. But there is another interesting twist that links back to my post yesterday (https://lnkd.in/ezNvMi6J): as with time, with goals too our perception often matters more than objective reality. (How we progress and how close we are to the goal are subjective - but let's leave that for another post.) So what's the lesson? Set up goals - either for yourselves, or for your customers or employees - that are within sight. Be smart with breaking down large tasks and missions, and framing progress with a focus on proximity to the goal. What do you think can be the downside of goal gradient effect? When was the last time you felt more eager to do something because you were close to the end (crazy examples are welcome, too!)? #30days30nudgets is my challenge to write 30 short posts in 30 days unfolding a phenomenon, observation or story with a #behaviouralscience element I came across in the world.