ABSTRACT
There is an emerging convergence between rational actor and normative accounts of what works in securing compliance with regulatory laws. This convergence is about the efficacy of tit-for-tat enforcement - regulation that is contingently tough and forgiving. Although Scholz and John Braithwaite posit contrary premises about human motivation and different intervening processes, their theories converge at a key point, namely the efficacy of regulation that is contingently tough and forgiving. The idea of the enforcement pyramid has advantages over the bipolar TFT notion of switching between cooperation and deterrence. Defection from cooperation is a less attractive option for a firm when confronted with a regulator armed with an enforcement pyramid than when confronted with a regulator having only one deterrence option. A tall enforcement pyramid can be used to apply enormous pressure from the heights of its peak to motivate `voluntary compliance.
