2006
DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2005.08.003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Goal setting, evaluation, learning and revision: A dynamic modeling approach

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
33
0

Year Published

2007
2007
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

3
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 38 publications
(33 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
0
33
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For behavioral decision heuristics, see for example [25,42,43]. c The fourth simplified game is obtained from the original game by changing the dynamic ''Shipment Capacity'' to a constant and setting it equal to 30 items/week.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For behavioral decision heuristics, see for example [25,42,43]. c The fourth simplified game is obtained from the original game by changing the dynamic ''Shipment Capacity'' to a constant and setting it equal to 30 items/week.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this situation, management has two options. They can either adjust the long‐term goal to be closer to the performance achieved by the short‐term actions, or they can apply a longer‐term fix that targets the cause of the gap (see Barlas and Yasarcan, , , for a comprehensive model of goal dynamics in organizations). In the context of failing to achieve long‐term goals, it is hypothesized that management will adjust the long‐term goal downward to be closer to actual performance (i.e., the loop representing the symptomatic fix dominates; Braun, ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, with respect to the difficulty of the goal, individuals might pursue sequential goals, which differ in their level of difficulty: they might function well with less challenging goals if they perceive the accomplishment of these goals as the basis for pursuing more difficult and challenging goals in the future (Fried & Slowik, 2004). Another example relates to the concept of floating goals (see Barlas & Yasarcan, 2006), a more sophisticated and realistic goal-related structure in which the difficulty of the goal is adjusted depending on current conditions (e.g., if the performance of an individual is persistently poor in approaching the original goal, then he/she lowers the goal, but if he/she exhibits surprisingly good performance, then the goal is pushed higher). These new approaches raise questions concerning the optimal sequence of goals, and the way in which the goals should be adjusted over time in order to maximize long-term performance.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%