Goal-Setting Theory

Goal Setting Theory Describing Goal Setting Theory and Summarizing a Sample of Research on the Theory Goal-Setting Theory: Overview and current research Description Goal-setting theory was first developed by (Locke & Latham 2005) for the benefit of industrial/organizational (I/O) psychology. The theory's basic tenant is that setting higher goals lead to higher levels of task performance vs. easier or more abstract goals. The follower must be committed, have the ability to accomplish the goal, and must not be troubled by conflicting goals.

The organization must also identify a clear discrepancy between the present, where there is a deficit regarding goals, and the future where the goal must be realized for the organization to thrive (Locke & Latham 2005: 265). Several central mechanisms are at play regarding the theory. The first and foremost is the notion that people will only reach goals if they have a psychological awareness of the extent to which they are capable of great things.

That is why high goals yield greater performance, by creating an action-related structure for the employee's purpose. The second core component of the theory is the idea that performance requires both ability and motivation on the part of the employee (Locke & Latham 2005: 265). A highly motivated employee cannot do what he or she is not capable of doing on one hand but on the other hand even able employees will not do what they are not capable of doing if unmotivated.

Still, goals can be used to encourage employees to seek out new knowledge to meet objectives and to build upon their existing knowledge, when people are motivated by new and complex tasks. If the acquisition of new knowledge is a variable, this can complicate the attainment of the goal, as the ability of the individual to gain such know-how is an open question.

Complexity and difficulty as can 'role overload' (too much overwhelming complexity or a lack of necessary resources like time and knowledge to complete the task) can also mediate goal attainment. Other mediating variables which can impact the influence of high-goal setting include personality; availability of feedback; participation from the subordinate; job autonomy; and pay (Locke & Latham 2005: 265; Seijts et al. 2004). In other words, the ability to track one's goal and get feedback on the goal can also enhance completion.

High goals thus enhance productivity but only up to a point: the goals must be feasible to obtain, given existing resources (including personal resources). Goals can arise from a variety of sources. They may be internal, i.e., set by the individual, or by others. However, goal choice is still important. Studies have indicated that when there is a large discrepancy between set goals and actual performance goal revision may be necessary (Locke & Latham 2005: 266). The reason for the need for lowered expectations must be determined.

If ability or another uncontrollable constraint is the cause, this requires more rigorous goal revision than would a lack of motivation or effort, which would need to be addressed not by goal revision but by motivational theory. Research indicates that the best way to encourage individuals to meet complex tasks that they find challenging is to frame the goal-setting in a relatively step-by-step manner. For example, rather than focusing on the ultimate goal alone, first focus on the series of skill-related steps needed to achieve the goal.

Setting short-term learning goals are the best way to achieve the ultimate goal of enhanced performance. Framing the goal in a non-threatening, positive fashion can also be an asset to completion. Although high goals are desirable, people should not be made to believe as if their goal is beyond their grasp by emphasizing the difficulty of the goal too much. Research on goal setting Goal-setting theory has been substantiated by both experimental and observational research, according to Lunenburg (2011).

The notion of 'goals' underlines much of modern research on organizations, including Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs and Bandura's theory of social modeling (Lunenburg 2011: 1). People are more inclined to act in a particular fashion if motivated to do so. The critical insight of goal setting theory is setting people up for success within an organizational context (Lunenburg 2011: 1). Managers must also need to be cognizant of the fact that they cannot motivate employees with generalized 'mission statements' but rather must use highly specific goal statements as a tool of empowerment.

Values coherent with the organization fuel goals. Locke & Latham (2005) conducted over 400 studies to support their theory. However, research has also yielded the finding that personality can have a profound impact upon performance and the willingness to work hard to achieve high goals. A study by Seijts, Latham, Tasa, (2004) first measured the degree to which individuals were performance-oriented vs. knowledge-oriented. Knowledge-oriented individuals chose to perform tasks in which they could gain skills, which were complex and which were indeed 'high,' consistent with trait-based theories.

However, performance-oriented individuals solely focused on goals preferred easy tasks, given an apparent worry about looking foolish in making errors. This is an important caveat to goal-setting theory. Not all individuals may be as equally motivated by high goals, particularly those in a performance-oriented context .Certain professions might attract more performance-oriented individuals and thus intellectual challenges might be, for example, less motivation to a sales staff of commission-based salespersons vs. engineers. (Locke & Latham 2005: 266; Seijts et al. 2004).

Also, performance-oriented individuals, in contrast to the stereotype that 'goal-driven' people are highly motivated, may suffer from a lack of self-esteem. High goals they are suspicious of being able to attain may make them less willing to try, versus less challenging goals which, they think give them a venue in which to demonstrate their success. Knowledge-oriented individuals are emotionally resilient and can cope with setbacks in the face of knowledge.

Their higher self-esteem means they have less of a control-based orientation and are more willing to take risks in terms of pursuing internally-motivated goals, such as improving themselves (Locke & Latham 2005: 266; Seijts et al. 2004). This refinement in the research of the core principle of goal-setting theory is an important one. It is not possible to make a blanket statement that everyone is more motivated by a high, challenging goal, although such goals generally do seem to enhance performance.

Managing individuals still requires sophisticated interpersonal skills and understanding of how other individuals operate. Additionally, it is a caveat to remember when hiring individuals. Selecting knowledge-driven individuals can be a profound enhancement to the organization, given that they are more willing to take risks. However, a system of incentives can still be constructed to better motivate individuals, regardless of their personality characteristics or tendencies towards knowledge or goal-orientations. Setting smaller achievable.