| Conscious Goal Setting Versus Subconscious Motives: Longitudinal and Concurrent Effects on the Performance of Entrepreneurial Firms |
| | Tracy, Kay B. | K. Tracy Associates | gtracy@erols.com | (703) 818-8038 |
| | Locke, Edwin A. | U. of Maryland | elocke@rhsmith.umd.edu | 301-405-2238 |
| | Renard, Monika M. | West Virginia U. | mrenard@wvu.edu | (304) 594-1299 |
| | Longitudinal and concurrent data from entrepreneur/owners of small printing
firms were investigated to discover whether the conscious motive of Goal
Setting, or the subconscious motives of Need for Achievement and Task
Motivation were better predictors of firm performance. Entrepreneurs'
goals were related to performance both concurrently and longitudinally.
Neither entrepreneurs' Need for Achievement nor Task Motivation had a main
effect on performance at either time. There were significant interactions
between goals and the other proposed predictors on the growth performance,
financial performance, and innovation performance of the firms. Results
discuss contribution to our knowledge of motivation, and practical
implications for success of entrepreneurs and entrepreneurial firms.
|
| | Keywords: entrepreneur; motivation; longitudinal |
| The Relative Effect of Learning, Outcome, and Proximal Goals on a Complex Task |
| | Seijts, Gerard H. | U. of Manitoba | seijtsgh@ms.umanitoba.ca | (204) 474-9529 |
| | Latham, Gary P. | U. of Toronto | latham@mgmt.utoronto.ca | (416) 978-4916 |
| | The effects of learning and outcome goals in conjunction with a proximal goal was investigated in a laboratory setting (n = 96).
A "do your best" outcome goal led to higher performance than the assignment of a specific, difficult outcome goal. This effect
was mediated through self-efficacy. However, the assignment of a specific, difficult learning goal led to higher performance than
urging people to "do their best." Proximal goals in conjunction with a distal goal did not lead to higher performance than the
setting of a distal goal alone. Participants' self-efficacy was positively and significantly related to performance; this effect was
mediated through strategy development. Participants assigned a specific, difficult learning goal reported significantly stronger
commitment to the goal than did participants assigned a specific, difficult outcome goal. |
| | Keywords: learning goals; outcome goals; proximal goals |
| The assessment of goal commitment: A measurement model meta-analysis |
| | Klein, Howard J. | Ohio State U. | klein.12@osu.edu | (614)-292-0719 |
| | Wesson, Michael J. | Michigan State U. | wessonmi@pilot.msu.edu | (517)-353-9535 |
| | Hollenbeck, John R. | Michigan State U. | jrh@pilot.msu.edu | 517-355-2413 |
| | DeShon, Richard P. | Michigan State U. | deshon@pilot.msu.edu | (517)-353-4624 |
| | Goals are central to current treatments of work motivation and goal commitment is a critical construct in understanding the relationship between goals and task performance. Inconsistency in the measurement of goal commitment hindered early research in this area but the nine-item, self-report scale developed by Hollenbeck, Williams, and Klein (1989), and derivatives of that scale, have become the most commonly used measures of goal commitment. Despite this convergence, there remains some debate over the dimensionality of this measure, with three different groups of authors making three different assertions. As a result, researchers may be confused over what version, if any, of this scale should be used to assess goal commitment. The current study combines the results of 17 independent samples and 2918 subjects to provide a more conclusive assessment by combining meta-analytic and confirmatory factor analytic techniques. This effort reflects the first combined use of these techniques to test a measurement model and allowed for the creation of a data base 7 to 20 times larger then previously factor analyzed samples containing these scale items. Results clarified a number of debated issues that have arisen out of previous small sample factor analyses and revealed a five-item scale that is unidimensional and unaffected by goal origin or task complexity. It is recommended that this five-item scale be used in future research assessing goal commitment. |
| | Keywords: commitment; goal-setting; measurement |
| Another Paper on Goals, Self-Efficacy and Performance, But a Very Different Set of Findings |
| | Vancouver, Jeffrey B. | Ohio U. | vancouve@oak.cats.ohiou.edu | (740)-593-1071 |
| | Williams, Amy A. | New York U. | amy@psych.nyu.edu | (212)-998-7690 |
| | Thompson, Charles M. | Ohio U., Athens | ct229589@oak.cats.ohiou.edu | (740)-592-3708 |
| | The common interpretation of the positive correlation between self-efficacy, personal goals, and performance is questioned. Via self-efficacy theory (Bandura, 1977; 1986; 1997) it is predicted that the cross-sectional correlational results are likely a function of performance's positive influence on self-efficacy, and via control theory (Powers, 1973; 1991), it is predicted that self-efficacy negatively influences subsequent performance. These predictions were supported when a within-person analysis procedure was used to assess the direction of causality for the positive between-person correlational findings. In addition, personal goals were positively influenced by self-efficacy and performance, but negatively related to subsequent performance. Results are discussed in terms of the conditions likely to bring on the negative results reported here as opposed to the positive results commonly reported, and the implications regarding theory and study designs. |
| | Keywords: Self-Efficacy; Personal Goals; Control Theory |
| Mood and the Goal Setting-Performance Relationship |
| | Davis, Mark A. | U. of North Texas | davism@unt.edu | (940) - 369 - 7031 |
| | Kirby, Susan L. | Texas Tech U. | slkirby@hotmail.com | 956-381-2987 |
| | Little, Bryan D. | U. of Kentucky | bdlitt0@pop.uky.edu | (606) - 257-2962 |
| | Fletcher, Donna E. | Texas Tech U. | cwrdf@ttacs.ttu.edu | 806-742-3711 |
| | On the basis of empirical studies demonstrating mood-congruent judgments, George and Brief (1996) propose that positive mood states foster higher performance standards (i.e., goal setting) than do negative mood states. However, research on minimal goal setting suggests the opposite pattern may emerge. That is, negative affective states may reduce judgements of prospective performance, which in turn motivate individuals to set higher minimum performance standards. We test these competing predictions in separate experiments using two different cognitive tasks. Consistent with the George and Brief perspective, data from the first experiment indicate that positive mood subjects set higher performance goals than negative mood subjects do. However, the potency of mood effects on the selection of goal level was not great enough to produce the performance increments that typically occur with differences in goal difficulty. In addition, we failed to replicate the mood effects on performance goals in a second experiment using a distinctly different cognitive task, although affective state did have some impact on task performance. The role of ambiguity in accentuating affective influences on performance goal judgments and the complex relations among task behavior, experienced affect, and motivational processes are discussed. Key words: mood, goals, performance |
| | Keywords: mood; goals; performance |