New Directions in Goal-Setting Theory

Abstract

ABSTRACT-Goal-setting theory is summarized regarding the effectiveness of specific, difficult goals; the relationship of goals to affect; the mediators of goal effects; the relation of goals to self-efficacy; the moderators of goal effects; and the generality of goal effects across people, tasks, countries, time spans, experimental designs, goal sources (i.e., self-set, set jointly with others, or assigned), and dependent variables. Recent studies concerned with goal choice and the factors that influence it, the function of learning goals, the effect of goal framing, goals and affect (well-being), group goal setting, goals and traits, macrolevel goal setting, and conscious versus subconscious goals are described. Suggestions are given for future research. KEYWORDS-goal setting; self-efficacy; commitment; subconscious goals Goal-setting theory (Locke & Latham, 1990 was developed inductively within industrial/organizational (I/O) psychology over a 25-year period, based on some 400 laboratory and field studies. These studies showed that specific, high (hard) goals lead to a higher level of task performance than do easy goals or vague, abstract goals such as the exhortation to ''do one's best.'' So long as a person is committed to the goal, has the requisite ability to attain it, and does not have conflicting goals, there is a positive, linear relationship between goal difficulty and task performance. Because goals refer to future valued outcomes, the setting of goals is first and foremost a discrepancycreating process. It implies discontent with one's present condition and the desire to attain an object or outcome.Goals are related to affect in that goals set the primary standard for self-satisfaction with performance. High, or hard, goals are motivating because they require one to attain more in order to be satisfied than do low, or easy, goals. Feelings of success in the workplace occur to the extent that people see that they are able to grow and meet job challenges by pursuing and attaining goals that are important and meaningful.

Unique effects of setting goals on behavior change: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

“…Goal setting theory (Locke & Latham, 2002;Locke & Latham, 2006) was derived from a series of industrial / organizational psychology experiments regarding work-related task performance (Locke & Latham, 2002). The original theory posits that goal setting will promote behavior change when two conditions are met: (a) the goal must be conscious and specific, and (b) the goal must be sufficiently difficult (i.e., over and above what is usually achieved).…”

“…Goal setting theory (Locke & Latham, 2002;Locke & Latham, 2006) makes a distinction between goals that focus on behavior and goals that focus on outcomes. For example, someone who wishes to lose weight may set a behavioral goal of not snacking between meals or an outcome goal of losing 1lb of weight per week.…”

“…Goal setting theory (Locke & Latham, 2002;Locke & Latham, 2006) postulates that goals are optimally effective if: (a) the goal is sufficiently difficult, (b) people are committed to the goal, (c) the task complexity is not too high, (d) feedback on goal progress is provided, and (e) there are adequate situation resources / few situational constraints.…”

“…Manipulating goal commitment was associated with a small but significant effect; however, the size of this effect (d = .20; k = 27) was significantly lower than the effect of those studies that used goal setting alone (d = .34). Goal theory (Locke & Latham, 1990;Locke & Latham, 2002;Locke & Latham, 2006) states that goal commitment is a necessary prerequisite for goal attainment when the goals are difficult. There were too few studies to explore the effect of manipulating goal commitment only when goal difficulty was high (k = 1).…”

“…An additional factor that may account for the mixed results is the fact that task complexity has typically been operationalized objectively (i.e., the number of task components) but may include subjective components such as the capability of the individual to perform the task. Indeed, later versions of goal setting theory suggest that if the complexity of a task exceeds the person's ability then a learning goal rather than a performance goal should be set (Locke & Latham, 2006).…”