Importance of participative goal setting and anticipated rewards on goal difficulty and job performance.

In Study 1, 76 engineers/scientists either participated in the setting of, or were assigned, specific behavioral goals during their performance appraisal. Participative goal setting resulted in more difficult goals being set than was the case when the goals were assigned. Perceptions of goal difficulty, however, were not significantly different in the 2 goal-setting conditions. In Study 2, the analysis of the performance data collected 6 mo later on 132 engineers/scientists revealed main effects for both goal setting and anticipated rewards. Only participative goal setting led to significantly higher performance than a "do your best" and a control group condition. There was no significant difference between the performance of the latter 2 conditions despite the fact that the individuals in the do-your-best group received knowledge of results. (20 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Effects of assigned versus participatively set goals, knowledge of results, and individual differences on employee behavior when goal difficulty is held constant.

In Exp I, 60 female clerical workers were randomly assigned to participative, assigned, and "do best" goal conditions on a clerical test. Specific goals led to higher performance than did the "do best" goals. With goal difficulty held constant, there was no significant difference between the assigned and participative conditions on performance or goal acceptance. Goal attainment, however, was higher in the assigned condition than it was in the participative condition. No main or interaction effects were found for knowledge of results (KR) or for individual difference measures with performance or goal acceptance. However, high self-esteem Ss who received KR attained their goals more often than did Ss with low self-esteem when the goals were participatively set. Exp II was conducted with 28 employees from the same sample in a performance-appraisal setting over an 8-mo period. Assigned goals resulted in higher performance and greater goal acceptance than participatively set goals. There was a positive linear relationship between goal difficulty and performance in the participative condition only. (10 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

"Task planning and energy expended: Exploration of how goals influence performance": Correction to Earley et al.

Reports an error in "Task planning and energy expended: Exploration of how goals influence performance" by P. Christopher Earley, Pauline Wojnaroski and William Prest (Journal of Applied Psychology, 1987[Feb], Vol 72[1], 107-114). Table 1 on page 109 appeared with reversed labels for the high and low conditions. The corrected Table 1 is provided in the erratum. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 1987-17299-001.) Although many studies demonstrate the effectiveness of goal setting in organizations, it is unclear how goals actually influence performance. The present studies examined the effect of assigned goals and task information on performance, energy expended, and task planning or organizing. In Study 1, a 2×2 (Information×Goal) design was used. Subjects were 72 undergraduates working on a business simulation. In Study 2, 129 male and female workers from a service organization and a moving company responded to a survey assessing an individual's goal setting, job training, energy expended during a typical task performance, and task planning undertaken prior to performance. The results of both studies demonstrated that goal setting and task training influenced the dependent variables. In addition to influencing an individual's energy expended (effort and persistence), a specific goal led an individual to plan and organize more than did an individual given a general goal (i.e., "do your best"). The results of both studies suggest that goal setting and task-relevant information influence performance, in part, through their influence on energy expended and planning. (22 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Task planning and energy expended: Exploration of how goals influence performance.

[Correction Notice: An erratum for this article was reported in Vol 72(3) of Journal of Applied Psychology (see record 2008-10684-001). Table 1 on page 109 appeared with reversed labels for the high and low conditions. The corrected Table 1 is provided in the erratum.] Although many studies demonstrate the effectiveness of goal setting in organizations, it is unclear how goals actually influence performance. The present studies examined the effect of assigned goals and task information on performance, energy expended, and task planning or organizing. In Study 1, a 2&×&2 (Information&×&Goal) design was used. Subjects were 72 undergraduates working on a business simulation. In Study 2, 129 male and female workers from a service organization and a moving company responded to a survey assessing an individual's goal setting, job training, energy expended during a typical task performance, and task planning undertaken prior to performance. The results of both studies demonstrated that goal setting and task training influenced the dependent variables. In addition to influencing an individual's energy expended (effort and persistence), a specific goal led an individual to plan and organize more than did an individual given a general goal (i.e., "do your best"). The results of both studies suggest that goal setting and task-relevant information influence performance, in part, through their influence on energy expended and planning. (22 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

"Effect of previously assigned goals on self-set goals and performance": Correction to Locke, Frederick, Buckner, and Bobko.

Reports an error in "Effect of previously assigned goals on self-set goals and performance" by Edwin A. Locke, Elizabeth Frederick, Elizabeth Buckner and Philip Bobko (Journal of Applied Psychology, 1984[Nov], Vol 69[4], 694-699). The third line was left out on p. 696, top right column. The entire section should read as follows: "Figure 1 compares the goals on T-1 with the mean goals chosen on T-2 by the same groups of subjects (i.e., grouped according to T-1 goals). On T-2 the mean goal levels of the seven original groups ranged from 4.8 to 12.9, in contrast with the T-1 range of 2 to 26." (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 1985-08583-001.) 231 undergraduates were asked to list from 2–26 uses for common objects depending on the level of difficulty of the section (1 of 7) to which they were assigned. Ss were given a 1-min practice trial after task explanations and were then administered 2 experimental trials. Ss were told they were free to change their goals to a higher or lower level for the 2nd trial if they did not like the goal they had been assigned. Results show that Ss chose more difficult goals, if the assigned goals had been easy, and easier goals, if the assigned goals had been difficult. Ss were heavily influenced in their self-set goals by their previously assigned goals. The performance of Ss with impossible goals did not drop on the 2nd trial. A goal–expectancy interaction was found on the 2nd trial that was due to expectancy being positively related to performance at the higher but not the lower goal levels. (8 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Comparison of participatively set and assigned goals in the reduction of alcohol use.

The effects of setting goals on goal commitment, self-efficacy for goal achievement, and goal achievement in the context of an alcohol use intervention were examined using an experimental design in which participants were randomized to participatively set goals, assigned goals, and no goal conditions. One hundred and twenty-six heavy-drinking college students received a single cognitive-behavioral assessment/intervention session and completed measures of goal commitment, self-efficacy for goal achievement, and alcohol use. Results were consistent with, and expanded upon, previous research by demonstrating that having a goal for limiting alcohol consumption was predictive of lower quantity and frequency of alcohol use relative to not having a goal. Participation in goal setting yielded greater goal commitment and self-efficacy for goal achievement than assigned goals, but did not result in significantly greater reductions in alcohol use relative to assigned goals. Goal commitment and self-efficacy explained unique variance in the prediction of alcohol use at follow-up. Findings support the importance of goal setting in alcohol interventions and suggest areas for further research. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

A first examination of the relationships between primed subconscious goals, assigned conscious goals, and task performance.

The authors conducted 2 studies of subconscious goal motivation. First, the authors ran a pilot study to establish the effects of priming of subconscious goals on a performance task frequently used in goal setting research. Second, the authors conducted the main study in which the authors examined the effects of both priming of subconscious goals and assigned conscious goals on the same performance task. The authors found significant main effects of both manipulations and a significant interaction between subconscious and conscious goals. The effects of conscious difficult and do-best goals were enhanced by subconscious goals, although conscious easy goals were not affected. All effects from the main study still held after 1 day. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Memory performance and beliefs as a function of goal setting and aging.

This research examined the impact of goals on memory and memory beliefs. Older and younger adults completed memory beliefs questionnaires and list recall at baseline. After additional recall trials, the questionnaires were repeated. In Experiment 1, participants were assigned to low challenge or high challenge goals. In Experiment 2, moderate challenge goals were compared to control. In both studies, participants were given a specific goal based on their own performance and received positive feedback for memory gains. Both older and younger adults responded to the goals, showing improved performance across trials, with little change in the control condition. Memory beliefs changed in the moderate and low challenge goal conditions, showing more striking changes for the older groups. These results confirmed that self-regulatory processes related to goal setting can have considerable impact on memory across the adult life span. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Task Interest and Actual Performance: The Moderating Effects of Assigned and Adopted Purpose Goals.

This research examined whether and which purpose goals moderate the relationship between task interest and actual performance and whether assigned goals have different effects (Study 1) than adopted goals (Study 2). Two studies were conducted using a full 2 X 2 design of the performance-mastery and approach-avoidance distinctions, plus control conditions. In the control conditions, that is, in a neutral purpose goal context, the expected positive relationship between initial task interest and actual performance was found. In a purpose goal context, this link held only for a congruent mastery-approach goal (either assigned or adopted). The gain in task interest found in a neutral purpose context was observed in the purpose goal conditions only when participants attained their purpose goals. It was concluded that having an incongruent purpose goal may undermine the positive effect of prior task interest on actual performance as well as on subsequent task interest. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Effects of Assigned and Participative Goal Setting on Performance and Job Satisfaction: Erratum.

Reports an error in the the article "Effects of Assigned and Participative Goal Setting on Performance and Job Satisfaction" by Gary P. Latham and Gary A. Yukl (Journal of Applied Psychology. Vol 61(2) Apr 1976, 166-171). The last paragraph in the Results section subtitled "Manipulation Check and Reliability of Measures" on page 168 was a repetition of the previous paragraph. It should be changed to read as follows: The internal consistency of the satisfaction measure was .83, The stability of the satisfaction scale, as estimated by the correlation between the before and after measures of satisfaction, was .70 (p 1977-30702-001.) Evaluated the job performance of 41 female typists under participative or assigned goal setting conditions over a 10-wk period. Significant productivity improvement occurred in both conditions during the 2nd 5 wks. There was no significant difference between conditions with respect to goal difficulty or frequency of goal attainment. Job satisfaction declined slightly in both conditions. Individual trait measures such as need for independence did not moderate the effects of either type of goal setting. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Regulation of Achievement Goals: The Role of Competence Feedback.

Two studies examined the degree to which pursuit of achievement goals is regulated in response to ongoing competence feedback. In Study 1, conducted in a college classroom, goal pursuit remained largely stable throughout the semester, yet poor exam performance predicted a significant decrease in mastery goal and performance-approach goal pursuit and an increase in performance-avoidance goal pursuit. In Study 2, conducted in a laboratory, negative feedback reduced participants' mastery goal pursuit. In addition, both studies showed unique benefits of 2 goals: The performance-approach goal predicted success on exams (Study 1) and a novel activity (Study 2), and the mastery goal predicted higher interest in both studies. Implications of achievement goal regulation for both theory and research methodology are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The effects of goal setting and group size on performance in a social dilemma.

Examined the effect of self-set personal and assigned group goal setting on an individual's behavior in 3- and 7-person groups confronted with a social dilemma. 274 Ss earned between $1.82 and $4.94 by investing money in either a personal account or a group account. Self-set personal goals that were compatible with an assigned group goal led to higher group performance than self-set incompatibly high ("greedy") personal goals. Collective-efficacy in making money, outcome expectancies that cooperation with others leads to the attainment of the group's goal, and group goal commitment correlated positively with group performance. Ss in 7-person groups (N?=?28) were less cooperative than those in 3-person groups (N?=?26). Ss in 7-person groups had lower collective-efficacy, lower outcome expectancies, and lower commitment to the group goal than did Ss in 3-person groups. Furthermore, individual performance in 7-person groups was significantly lower than individual performance in 3-person groups. A social dilemma appears to be a boundary condition for the normally positive effect of group goal setting on group performance. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Effects of job enrichment and task goals on satisfaction and productivity: Implications for job design.

A 2-phase research project investigated the effects of job enrichment and goal setting on employee productivity and satisfaction in a well-controlled, simulated job environment. In the 1st phase, 2 conditions of goal setting (assigned goals vs no goals) and 2 conditions of job enrichment (enriched vs unenriched) were established, producing 4 experimental conditions in which 42 part-time workers took part. Job enrichment had a substantial impact on job satisfaction but little effect on productivity. Goal setting, on the other hand, had a major impact on productivity and a less substantial impact on satisfaction. In the 2nd phase (after 2 days' work), Ss with unenriched jobs worked under the enrichment conditions and Ss originally without goals were assigned goals. Again, job enrichment had a positive effect on job satisfaction, while goal setting had a positive effect on performance. Results are discussed in terms of the current theoretical approaches for understanding employee motivation on the job. (32 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Effect of previously assigned goals on self-set goals and performance.

[Correction Notice: An erratum for this article was reported in Vol 70(2) of Journal of Applied Psychology (see record 2008-10965-001). The third line was left out on p. 696, top right column. The entire section should read as follows: "Figure 1 compares the goals on T-1 with the mean goals chosen on T-2 by the same groups of subjects (i.e., grouped according to T-1 goals). On T-2 the mean goal levels of the seven original groups ranged from 4.8 to 12.9, in contrast with the T-1 range of 2 to 26."] 231 undergraduates were asked to list from 2–26 uses for common objects depending on the level of difficulty of the section (1 of 7) to which they were assigned. Ss were given a 1-min practice trial after task explanations and were then administered 2 experimental trials. Ss were told they were free to change their goals to a higher or lower level for the 2nd trial if they did not like the goal they had been assigned. Results show that Ss chose more difficult goals, if the assigned goals had been easy, and easier goals, if the assigned goals had been difficult. Ss were heavily influenced in their self-set goals by their previously assigned goals. The performance of Ss with impossible goals did not drop on the 2nd trial. A goal–expectancy interaction was found on the 2nd trial that was due to expectancy being positively related to performance at the higher but not the lower goal levels. (8 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Assigned versus participative goal setting with educated and uneducated woods workers.

Conducted a field experiment of (a) 24 educationally disadvantaged woods worker crews and (b) 24 educated logging crews to compare assigned goal setting, participative goal setting, and a "do your best" condition. The experiment was conducted separately for each sample. Results show that for the uneducated Ss, the participative condition had higher productivity than the assigned and "do your best" conditions. In addition, goal difficulty and goal attainment were significantly higher in the participative condition than in the assigned condition. No significant differences among conditions were found for the educated Ss, although this may have been due to problems in implementation of the goal-setting program with this sample. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Relationships between goal clarity, participation in goal setting, and personality characteristics on job satisfaction in a scientific organization.

Studied the impact of 2 attributes of task goals (goal specificity and participation in goal setting) on employee satisfaction with 271 scientists and engineers (mean age, 46.5 yrs). The moderating influences of 3 personality variables as measured by the Adjective Check List were also determined. Ss were blocked into 3 levels on both a Goal Clarity-Planning factor and a Participation in Goal Setting factor based on a factor analysis of items reflecting employee perceptions of how their supervisors manage. Ss were also divided into high and low levels of need for achievement, autonomy, and affiliation. Analyses of variance indicated that Goal Clarity-Planning and Participation in Goal Setting were factors linearly and positively related to satisfaction, as were all 3 personality variables. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Effects of goals and feedback on performance in groups.

In the first study, 26 undergraduate pairs and 52 individuals worked on a perceptual speed task for 20 min to win prizes based on performance. The pairs set group goals and individual goals to be attained, whereas the individuals set only individual goals. Despite the equal levels of individual goals set, goal acceptance and performance were significantly higher for the pairs than for the individuals. A stepwise hierarchical regression analysis supported the contributions of goal acceptance and group goals to performance. In the second study, 50 undergraduate pairs were assigned a goal to be attained as teams on a perceptual speed task lasting 15 min. Group and individual task feedback, given after 7? min of work, significantly improved performance only for those subjects who were below target for either group or individual feedback, yielding interaction effects on performance. The implications of the findings for group goal setting, social loafing, and organizational effectiveness are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The Projection of Implicit and Explicit Goals.

In 3 studies, the authors analyzed whether projection occurs for both conscious and nonconscious goals. In Experiment 1, participants who were predisposed to hold a learning goal over a performance goal rated others as possessing more of a learning goal. In Experiment 2, participants who were either implicitly primed with or explicitly assigned to have the goal to compete perceived others as striving for competitive goals more than control participants. In Experiment 3, the authors demonstrated that it was the actual goal to compete rather than the trait construct of competitiveness that was projected. The control of automatic goal projection effects is discussed, and interpersonal consequences of goal projection are delineated. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Proximal versus distal goal setting and intrinsic motivation.

A. Bandura and D. H. Schunk (see record 1982-07527-001) demonstrated that proximal goal setting can develop self-efficacy and intrinsic motivation from previously low levels. The present study examined the effect of goal proximity on intrinsic motivation when initial task interest was high. 66 female undergraduates were assigned either proximal or distal performance goals, or were not provided with goals, prior to completing a series of enjoyable word puzzles. Distal goal setting enhanced subsequent intrinsic motivation relative to conditions involving proximal goals or no goals. Proximal goal setting, however, produced more positive goal attainment expectations over the course of task engagement and enhanced final perceptions of performance quality to a lesser degree. Findings are interpreted according to E. L. Deci's (1975) cognitive evaluation theory of intrinsic motivation. (45 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Bonuses, goals, and instrumentality effects.

Three experimental studies showed that bonuses based on end-of-period determinations of standards led to the setting of more challenging goals but lower performance than a control condition in which bonuses were based on the achievement of self-set goals. Performance differences between the bonus and control conditions were not mediated by levels of self-set goals or goal commitment as predicted by goal theory. However, self-set goals and self-efficacy were significant predictors of performance within both the bonus and control conditions. Changes in performance under the end-of-period bonus condition in Study 3 were fully mediated by judgments of instrumentality. Participants in the end-of-period bonus condition were less certain of receiving a bonus, and this negatively affected their performance. Implications for the use of appraisal ratings to allocate bonuses and for the design of bonus schemes for management are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)