Introduction: Why Knowing Is Not Doing

Every investigator has experienced a situation where the plan is ready, the steps are clear, and the next move seems obvious, yet progress stops. This moment is not caused by laziness or lack of discipline. It is what psychologists call a crisis of action, a point where understanding does not lead to execution.

Recognizing how this happens can change the way investigators approach their work. Three psychological concepts developed by Julian Rotter, Albert Bandura, and Victor Vroom explain why people act, why they hesitate, and how to move from intention to completion. When these principles are applied to investigative work, they create a practical model for transforming knowledge into measurable results.

The Two Crises: Knowledge and Action

In professional practice there are two common barriers. The first is a crisis of knowledge, which occurs when an investigator simply does not know what to do. This problem is solved through training, mentorship, or research.

The second is a crisis of action, which occurs when the investigator knows exactly what to do but still does not begin. The problem lies in one of three areas: the importance of the goal, belief in the plan, or belief in personal ability. When one of these elements weakens, progress stops.

Julian Rotter: Value and Expectation

Julian Rotter, an American psychologist, proposed that every behavior depends on its potential to occur. This potential is determined by two factors: how valuable the outcome feels and how strongly a person believes that effort will lead to that outcome.

If either factor is missing, motivation disappears. For example, an investigator may value producing a detailed report but may not believe that the report will make a difference in the case. Without faith in the result, the work feels meaningless. When both value and expectation are high, action becomes almost automatic. Rotter’s theory reminds investigators that motivation depends on the combination of purpose and realistic belief in success.

Albert Bandura: Confidence in the Process

Albert Bandura, one of the most influential figures in modern psychology, introduced the concept of self-efficacy, which means confidence in one’s ability to complete specific tasks successfully.

Self-efficacy includes two forms of trust: belief in the plan and belief in oneself. A field investigator may believe that digital research is useful but doubt their technical ability. Another may feel capable but doubt that the strategy will work. In both cases, hesitation replaces movement.

Bandura’s research demonstrated that confidence grows through small, consistent successes. Each completed task strengthens a sense of ability. Mentorship, guided training, and feedback build confidence and lead to steady, dependable performance.

Victor Vroom: Linking Effort and Reward

Victor Vroom, a professor at Yale University, created the Expectancy Theory of Motivation. He explained that motivation relies on three links. Effort must lead to performance, performance must lead to reward, and the reward must have personal value.

If any of these links are weak, motivation falls apart. In investigative practice, this means that every professional must see how effort connects to results and how results connect to meaningful rewards. Clear communication of goals, measurable performance standards, and recognition of achievement help maintain that connection.

The Unified Formula

When these three theories are combined, they form a clear equation:

Action = Value of the Goal × Belief in the Plan × Belief in Yourself

If any factor equals zero, the probability of action becomes zero. Investigators can use this formula as a simple diagnostic tool. Rate the value of the goal, the clarity of the plan, and your confidence in completing it on a scale from zero to ten. The lowest score identifies the weak point. Often the problem is not motivation but uncertainty in one of these three areas.

Practical Application in Investigative Work

Surveillance: Break the task into smaller parts such as mapping locations, timing, and verifying equipment. Each step completed builds confidence and clarity.

OSINT and Background Research: Define measurable goals, such as confirming three separate identifiers for a subject. Clear targets prevent endless searching and promote completion.

Witness Interviews: Pair new investigators with experienced colleagues for early field interviews. Observing and repeating successful techniques develops confidence and consistency.

Reporting and Documentation: Avoid perfection paralysis by submitting a first draft soon after fieldwork. Timely submission reinforces action and improves accountability.

The Theory Behind the Practice

The foundation of this model comes from three scholars who transformed the study of human motivation. Julian B. Rotter (1916–2014) introduced Social Learning Theory and the concept of behavioral potential. He showed that behavior occurs when the importance of a goal combines with belief in success. His findings remind investigators that clarity of purpose and realistic expectation create movement.

Albert Bandura (1925–2021) developed the theory of self-efficacy. He demonstrated that confidence in personal ability is essential for consistent performance. His work supports the use of gradual progress, mentoring, and reinforcement to build professional strength.

Victor H. Vroom (born 1932) created the Expectancy Theory of Motivation, explaining that effort, performance, and reward must stay connected to sustain action. His work provides a structure for agencies to design clear expectations and recognition systems.

Together, the contributions of Rotter, Bandura, and Vroom form a complete framework for turning professional knowledge into consistent and measurable performance.

Five Key Lessons for Investigators

1. Identify the weakest link. Determine whether the obstacle is unclear value, poor planning, or lack of confidence.
2. Clarify the plan. Break every goal into clear, achievable steps.
3. Begin with small wins. Build momentum through immediate, attainable successes.
4. Use accountability. Regular check-ins and peer feedback maintain steady progress.
5. Lead with understanding. Supervisors who grasp the psychology of motivation manage more effectively and reduce burnout.

Conclusion

Action in investigations depends on more than willpower. It relies on value, structure, and belief. When all three align, forward movement becomes natural. When one weakens, the process halts.

When progress slows, ask three questions: Do I value this outcome? Do I trust the plan? Do I believe I can accomplish it? The lowest answer reveals the source of resistance. Strengthen that element, and action will follow.

© 2025 Bedan Investigations & Litigation Support
Florida Licensed Private Investigative Agency | Fl. License A3500265

By Semyon Berezhansky, Private Investigator | Fl. License C3500448
Managing Member, Bedan Investigations & Litigation Support

www.BedanGroup.com/Investigation