Goal-Setting Theory

Conceptual Overview

Goal-setting theory purports a direct link between setting achievable, specific, realistic, challenging, and measurable goals and increased performance among those participating, as noted by Edwin Locke and Judith Bryan in 1968. Resting on the premise that setting goals increases performance more than simply “agreeing to do your best,” goal-setting theory is based on the argument that goals motivate individuals, groups, and organizations to perform at a higher level. Goal setting derives its motivational force through six fundamental motivators: participating, rewarding, supporting, clarifying, communicating, and challenging, as noted by Locke and colleagues in 1988.

Participating suggests that goals motivate when those pursuing them participate in the goal-setting process. Belief that participation in the goal-setting process motivates employees gained experimental validity through a series of studies released in the 1970s. Since that time, the direct connection between increased performance and employees' participation[Page 561] in the goal-setting process has become firmly established in the literature, as Gary Latham and Gary Yukl wrote in 1975.

Rewarding denotes the incentives, either psychological or material, given to motivate achievement of goals. Research reveals mixed support for the motivating power of rewarding. Researchers, including John Mowen and colleagues in 1981, originally presented rewarding as an absolute—rewards lead to increased performance in goal-related tasks. However, closer study revealed that rewarding must be linked to realistic goals. For example, the limits of rewarding came under question when looking at the impact of rate incentives on motivation, as noted by Manuel London and Greg Oldham in 1977. Locke wrote in 2004 that goal-setting theory advocates countered by creating four reward systems: (1) rewards assigned to the achievement of a goal, (2) rewards attached to step goals that ultimately lead to a final goal, (3) a reward scale corresponding to increments of achievement leading toward a final goal, and (4) performance-based rewards doled out after the achievement of a goal.

Supporting motivates organizational members through coaches, managers, and leaders expressing their confidence in the ability of these members to accomplish the assigned goals, as noted by Latham in 2004. Locke wrote in 1988 that this expression of confidence can be verbal, written, or include the commitment of time and resources toward achieving the goal. Another type of supporting occurs when employees support one another, especially in achieving a team or organizationwide goal. Lack of supporting behavior among employees can undermine the achievement of goals by reducing receptivity to suggestions, which in turn leads to inefficiency, as noted by Suzanne Scott and Reginald Bruce in 1994.

Latham and Yukl wrote in 1975 that role clarity motivates by creating confidence among organizational members in regard to what part they will play in the goal-achievement process. Without clarity, employees find it difficult to establish the clear purpose, challenge, and meaning that are fundamental to the success of a goal-based system. Furthermore, lack of clarity can lead to anxiety and can result in lackluster performance. At first, researchers believed responsibility for role clarity sat with supervisors. Recent studies, however, stress the importance of role clarity in the acceptance of, commitment to, and personal orientation derived from the goal-setting process.

...