The dynamic effects of subconscious goal pursuit on resource allocation, task performance, and goal abandonment

Abstract

We test two potential boundary conditions for the effects of subconscious goals-the nature of the goal that is activated (achievement vs. underachievement) and conscious goal striving. Subconscious achievement goals increase the amount of time devoted to skill acquisition, and this increase in resource allocation leads to higher performance when conscious goals are neutral. However, specific conscious goals undermine the performance benefits of subconscious achievement goals. Subconscious underachievement goals cause individuals to abandon goal pursuit and this effect is mediated by task performance. Difficult conscious goals neutralize the detrimental effects of subconscious underachievement goals but only if implemented before performance is undermined. Overall, these results suggest that subconscious achievement goals facilitate task performance, subconscious underachievement goals trigger goal abandonment, and difficult conscious goals moderate these effects depending on the level of resource allocation and timing of goal implementation.

Two facets of conscientiousness and the knowledge sharing dilemmas in the workplace: Contrasting moderating functions of supervisor support and coworker support

“…This weak situation motivates dutiful workers to expend their other‐centered and cooperative mindsets for the sake of demonstrating their dependability. This situation also intensifies the negative effect of achievement striving on knowledge sharing because when achievement strivers are deprived of resources from coworkers and freed from normative pressure, they may conserve their personal resources, treat their coworkers as potential competitors, and focus on their own performance at the expense of others (Ng & Lucianetti, ; Sitzmann & Bell, ). Therefore, we hypothesize that the effects of dutifulness and achievement striving on knowledge sharing will be activated and become stronger under the low than high coworker support situation.Hypothesis The positive relationship between dutifulness and knowledge‐sharing behavior becomes strong when coworker support is low.Hypothesis The negative relationship between achievement striving and knowledge‐sharing behavior becomes strong when coworker support is low.…”

“…Thus, achievement‐striving individuals focus more on personal performance and less on the well‐being and benefit of others. When individuals focus on competing with and outperforming others, they believe that they can only be successful if others cannot attain their goals (Ng & Lucianetti, ; Sitzmann & Bell, ). Consequently, achievement‐striving individuals consider their coworkers to be potential competitors.…”

Resource Allocation and Innovativeness of Selected SMEs in Lagos State, Nigeria.

“…With respect to resource allocation having significant effect on innovativeness in selected small and medium scale enterprises performance, this study find alliance with the study of Arok et al, (2019) on resource allocation and management innovation among entrepreneurs in South Sudan and established that resource allocation has a positive and significant effect on the management innovation of SMEs in Juba City. Likewise, the study of Sitzmann and Bell (2017) that investigated the dynamic impacts of subconscious goal pursuit on task performance, resource allocation, and goal abandonment. According to the findings of the research, the subconscious success of goals promotes task performance, but subconscious under-attainment goals lead to goal abandonment, and challenging conscious objectives attenuate those effects depending on the amount of resource allocation and timing of target execution.…”

Boundaries of Constructive Choice: On the Accessibility of Maximize Accuracy and Minimize Effort Goals

“…Goals encourage the allocation of cognitive resources in accordance with the value of the reward one expects at the completion of goal pursuit (Berridge & Aldridge, 2008; Wigfield & Eccles, 2000). If deliberately pursued process goals guide behavior in accordance with goal systems theory, then people should (a) allocate more cognitive resources to the pursuit of more valued process goals (Sitzmann & Bell, 2017), (b) find the pursuit of a process goal intrinsically interesting (e.g., it is fun to make fast decisions), even if this behavior does not improve the quality of the choice (Laran & Janiszewski, 2011), (c) use feedback to manage (dis)engagement from process goals (Louro, Pieters, & Zeelenberg, 2007), and (d) chronically pursue process goals (Schwartz et al., 2002). More nuanced findings suggest there may be ways to alter the motivation to pursue a process goal by altering perceptions of goal attainability (Zhang, Fishbach, & Dhar, 2007), framing the time to complete the decision (Munichor & LeBoeuf, 2018), altering perceptions of goal progress (Koo & Fishbach, 2012), and interrupting goal pursuit (Jhang & Lynch, 2014).…”