Goal Setting by Groups Performing an Additive Task: A Comparison With Individual Goal Setting1

This article compares goal levels and task performance of groups and individuals that are assigned or self-set goals. Groups performed an additive task that allowed for direct comparison with individuals' i]ndependent performance of the task. Consistent with predictions, groups and individuals selected goals that were less difficult than assigned goals which required only a modest increase in performance. Group members and individuals who were assigned goals attained higher levels of performance than self-set or no goal condition subjects. The prediction that group members and individuals who self-set their goals would have more positive affective reactions to the goal-setting situation than participants in assigned condition was supported. The results of this study are consistent with the existing literature on groups and individuals regarding effects of goals, performance, and affective reactions. Analyses also indicate that the group goal decision process involves a compensatory strategy in which an average of group member preferences for the goal was used to reach a group goal decision. Discussion focuses on the similarities and differences between the findings of self-set and assigned goal-setting situations for groups and individuals, with particular reference to goal choice strategies, goal expectancies, and efficacy.     

Group and Individual Decision Making for Task Performance Goals: Processes in the Establishment of Goals:in Groups1

The study examines the processes by which goals in groups are established. Performance goals and preferences for goals were stated by individuals acting alone, by groups deciding in unison, and by group members. All subjects performed a card-sorting task as individuals, and self-set goals were selected for expected levels of individual performance. Groups selected goals that were less difficult than individual goals on several occasions of goal setting. Analysis of the group goal decisions suggests that a success-based social comparison process occurs that implies groups select a goal slightly lower than the average of the member preferences so that the group members may appear successful. Analyses also indicated that the lower group goals arose quickly in the group interaction, and that group members readily adopted the lower goals as appropriate levels of performance. Discussion focuses on the observed differences among group, group member, and individual performance goals, and the ability of the success-based social comparison process to account for these differences.     

Goal Specificity as a Determinant of Goal Commitment and Goal Change

Two hundred twenty-three subjects worked on an anagram solving task under one of two assigned goal conditions and then self-set goals on a brainstorming task. Both tasks were performed while under one of four specificity conditions. Results revealed that goal specificity raised goal commitment under assigned goal conditions and was related to goal change under self-set goal conditions. In addition, goal specificity was related to individuals′ variability in performance across trials under assigned goal conditions. The implications of these results for understanding the goal setting process are discussed.     

Using Judgmental Anchors to Establish Challenging Self-Set Goals Without Jeopardizing Commitment

We applied the decision-making literature on judgmental anchors to develop a strategy for establishing challenging self-set goals. In experiments involving the generation of uses for common objects, we demonstrated that introducing an arbitrary and unreasonably high anchor significantly increased the value selected as a self-set goal. Self-efficacy and task performance also increased subsequent to the introduction of a high anchor. These results of anchoring goals occurred without reducing the goal commitment that is associated with self-set goals. Moreover, when anchored self-set goals were compared to assigned goals, they were found to have similar levels of performance and greater goal commitment. Discussion focused on the implications of anchoring goals for the processes and outcomes related to assigned and self-set goal-setting situations.     

Effects of goal difficulty, self-set goals, and monetary rewards on dual task performance

The present study tests the effects of goal difficulty, goal origin (self-set vs assigned), and monetary rewards (present vs absent) on the simultaneous performance of two tasks (dual-task paradigm). Participants were 32 students working simultaneously on a computerized task of letter typing with the right hand and digit classification with the left hand. A 2 (self-set vs assigned goals) × 2 (present vs absent contingent monetary rewards) × 3 (easy, moderate, and difficult goals) factorial design with goal difficulty as the repeated factor was employed. Each task element was performed under easy, moderate, and difficult goals, which appeared in six consecutive trials of varied order within each experimental condition. Results indicate that self-set goals without monetary rewards led to the highest performance levels, whereas the combination of self-set goals and monetary rewards was detrimental to performance. These findings occurred (except in one case) only when goals were of either moderate Or high difficulty.     

The Effect of Commitment to a Learning Goal,Self-Efficacy,and the Interaction Between Learning Goal Difficulty and Commitment on Performance in a Business Simulation

The effect of commitment to a learning goal, self-efficacy, and the interaction between learning goal difficulty and goal commitment with performance was investigated using a highly complex business simulation. Participants (n?=?128) needed to acquire knowledge in order to perform the task effectively. The correlation between commitment to the learning goal and performance was positive and significant (r = .47, p < .001). Commitment was also a moderator of the learning goal–task performance effect. The relationship between self-efficacy and performance was partially mediated by commitment to the learning goal. Performance was a partial mediator of the relationship between goal commitment and self-efficacy. Seventy-five percent of the participants self-set a performance goal. The correlation between self-set performance goals and performance was positive and significant (r = .31, p < .001).     

Effect of Self- and Group Efficacy on Group Performance in a Mixed-Motive Situation

The effect of self- and group efficacy on the performance of three-person (N = 26) and seven-person (N = 28) groups on a mixed-motive investment task was investigated. The correlations between group efficacy for making money and the actual amount of money made by the groups were positive and significant. The relation between group efficacy and the group's performance was reciprocal. The results also indicated that members of three-person groups had significantly higher perceptions of group efficacy than members of seven-person groups even though they faced the identical mixed-motive investment task. The correlations between group efficacy and the group's performance were significantly higher than the correlations between aggregated values of self-efficacy for individual performance and the group's performance. Finally, multiple regression analyses showed that self-efficacy for individual performance had a negative effect on the group's performance.     

THE EFFECTS OF SELF-SET, PARTICIPATIVELY SET AND ASSIGNED GOALS ON THE PERFORMANCE OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES

A government agency wished to define effective supervisory behavior. Fifty-seven government employees participated in the job analysis. The employees were randomly assigned to one of three goal setting conditions, namely, self-set, participatively set, and assigned goals. The task required each individual to brainstorm individually job behaviors that he or she had seen make the difference between effective and ineffective job behavior as a supervisor. Goals were set in terms of the number of behaviors to be listed within 20 minutes. There was no significant difference in goal difficulty between those with participatively set goals and those with self-set goals. Goal difficulty was held constant between the participative and assigned goal conditions by imposing a goal agreed upon by an employee in the participative condition upon an employee in the assigned condition. There was no significant difference among the three goal setting conditions regarding goal acceptance or actual performance. This was true regardless of employee age, education, position level, years as a supervisor, or time employed in the public sector. The correlation between goal difficulty and performance was .62, .69, and .74, respectively, in the participative, self-set, and assigned goal conditions.     

Self-handicapping: The interplay between self-set and assigned achievement goals

This study examined the combined impact of self-set goals and manipulated goal contexts on self-handicapping to better understand how self-set goals affect responses to different performance-oriented achievement contexts. Participants reported their self-set goals and later completed an achievement task in a goal-context condition (performance-approach, performance-avoidance, no-goal). Before the task, participants had the opportunity to self-handicap (behaviorally and claimed). The results showed that self-set performance-approach and performance-avoidance goals positively predicted behavioral self-handicapping, but only in a performance-avoidance context. Additionally, self-set mastery-avoidance goals were found to predict claimed self-handicapping, regardless of the context condition. These results show that self-set achievement goals shape individuals behaviors associated with threat and promise in achievement situations.     

A Conceptualization and Test of the Influences of Individual Differences in Goal-Setting Situations1

This research tests a hypothesized model of the relationships among several individual differences and variables associated with the setting of goals. Participants were randomly assigned to a self-set goal condition, or to moderately or very-difficult assigned-goal conditions. By aggregating scores of performance, personal goals, ratings of self-efficacy, and goal commitment over multiple goal-setting and task-performance occasions, the overall relationships among these variables and need for achievement, self-esteem, and locus of control were determined. Results provide strong support for Locke and Latham's (1990a, 1990b) model of the goal-performance relation, but fail to support the hypothesized role of individual differences. The implications of these findings and individual differences in goal-setting situations are discussed.     

Perception in consequences of free riding

This study examined the relationships between perceptions of group members' free riding and group outcomes using Mulvey and Klein's 1998 perceived free riding scale. In a laboratory study, three free riding conditions were created (no free riding, free riding, free riding with justification) in which 97 college students performed two short number-finding tasks as members of temporary ad hoc three-person groups. 55% of the students were male and the average age was 22.9 yr. (SD= 3.0). Participants' perceptions of free riding were negatively related to commitment to the assigned group goal, task performance, and goals for group performance and individual performance. In the condition wherein free riding was justified by low ability, participants set lower goals for their future task performance than did those in the other two conditions.     

Type A behavior pattern and goal setting under different conditions of choice

This study examined the effects of the Type A behavior pattern on performance, goal acceptance, goal commitment, and expectancy of success under goal-setting conditions. Participants were assigned to one of four groups, assigned goal/assigned strategy, assigned goal/self-set strategy, self-set goal/assigned strategy, or self-set goal/self-set strategy. Results suggested that Type A persons were more likely to accept a difficult goal and remain committed to that goal, and that they had a higher expectancy of success than their Type B counterparts regardless of goal/strategy condition. With respect to performance, participants in the assigned goal/assigned strategy condition outperformed all other groups. A three-way interaction indicated that Type A persons performed better in the self-set goal/self-set strategy than Type B individuals. Implications of the findings regarding Type A and goal setting are discussed.     

Effects of cognitive heuristics and goals on negotiator performance and subsequent goal setting

The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of a situational constraint —an externally set goal — and related cognitive variables — outcome expectancies, perceived self-competency, and goal commitment — on the performance and goal setting of 79 novice negotiators. Expectancy judgments affected goal commitment but not performance or goal choice. Subjects assigned difficult goals were more profitable and set harder new goals than subjects assigned easier goals. Machiavellianism had a powerful effect on performance and exerted more causal influence on self-set goals than actual performance or prior goals. Unexpectedly, role assignment proved to be an important determinant of performance. A decision science perspective was utilized to explain the results.     

The Effects of Self-Set Goals on Task Performance

Locke & Latham (1990a) report that specific, difficult goals lead to better performance than "do-your-best" instructions, whether the goals are self-set or are set by an external source. However, in Experiment I, as well as in previous research (White, Kjelgaard, & Harkins, 1995), we did not find self-set goal effects. A meta-analysis showed that self-set goal effects can be produced if two conditions are met: Prior to setting their goals, participants take part in a pretest that is equal in duration to the experimental task; and the experimenter has access to the participants' goals and the performances. Experiment 2 confirmed these meta-analytic findings by showing that when these two conditions were met, goals stringent enough to produce the effects were set, and goal-setting effects were obtained.     

The Influence of Commitment to Assigned Goals and Performance on Subsequent Self-Set Goals and Performance1

Seventy-seven undergraduates were assigned a performance goal for the first of two trials of a word game, and set goals for themselves on a second trial. Goal commitment was hypothesized to moderate the influence of goal level on performance within both trials. In addition, commitment to the assigned Trial I goals was hypothesized to moderate the relationship between goal attainment and self-set goals for the second trial. Subjects' initial performance on a practice trial was also hypothesized to interact with the goal levels they were assigned on the first trial, such that individuals who performed relatively well on the practice trial were expected to evidence a greater positive relationship between goal level and performance than individuals who performed relatively poorly on the practice trial. The results of three moderated regression analyses yielded no support for the hypothesized within-trial moderating influence of goal commitment on goal level-performance relations. However, commitment to assigned goals and goal attainment did interact as related to personal goals for Trial 2. Further, the hypothesized influence of practice trial performance and assigned goal level on Trial I performance was supported. The results are discussed in terms of how goal levels should be determined and assigned to employees, and the role of goal commitment in goal setting predictions.     

Effects of participative vs assigned goals and feedback in a multitrial task

A dynamic multitrial perspective on goal setting was adopted in order to investigate the effects of both goals (assigned vs participative) and goal-discrepant performance feedback on subsequent goal commitment and performance. Eighty subjects were initially assigned to either an assigned or participative goal condition, and performed a multitrial task with all subjects receiving goal discrepant performance feedback following the first task trial. Assigned rather than participative goal setting led to higher goal commitment, and large goal/feedback discrepancies led to greater reductions in subsequent goals. Because of these goal changes, the ability of initial goals to predict performance decreased over trials. However, when goal commitment, which reflects revised goals, was also considered, the ability to predict performance actually increased over trials. A moderating effect for need achievement was obtained such that higher-need achievers were more goal committed and performed better under participative goal setting than low-need achievers. Discussion focused on the practical and theoretical importance of a dynamic goal-setting perspective in explaining and predicting responses to goals and feedback systems.     

Group performance as a function of group type,task condition and scholastic level

Studied performance on a multiple-solution anagrams task by two-member nominal, pseudo, quasi, and real groups in relation to task conditions (set versus nonset) and school grades (10th, 11th, and 12th). Nominal groups were made up of individuals working alone. Pseudo groups were made up of members sitting together but working independently for individual scores. Quasi groups were made up of members who were working together for a common or shared goal but were not allowed to communicate with each other. Real groups were the usual teams of freely interacting and mutually consulting members. Five words were presented to the subjects in the set condition (unlike in the nonset co ndition) in order to channelize their problem-solving activity in particular directions. The subjects were 192 male American high school students. The most important finding was that both nominal and pseudo groups produced more errors than real groups. Also the set condition generated more errors than the nonset condition. These and other findings were discussed and interpreted in the context of previous research.     

The combined effects of goal type and cognitive ability on performance

We tested the combined effects of goal type and cognitive ability on task performance using a moderately complex task. Business students (N = 105) worked on a 24 min class scheduling task. The results showed that participants with higher cognitive ability benefited more from the setting of a performance goal as opposed to a learning goal. The reverse pattern was true for participants with lower cognitive ability. Performance goals were more effective for participants with higher cognitive ability vis-à-vis those with lower cognitive ability. The correlation between goal commitment and performance was positive and significant as was the correlation between cognitive ability and performance.     

Effects of Task Complexity and Goal Specificity on Change in Strategy and Performance Over Time

In this study we examined whether task complexity interacts with goal specific- ity over multiple performance periods. A 2 x 2 x 3 design manipulated goal condition (specific difficult vs. do-your-best) and task complexity (simple vs. complex) over performance on 3 separate days. Results across performance periods indicated that do-your-best goals led to higher quantity of performance than specific difficult goals on a complex task, whereas specific difficult goals led to higher quantity of performance than do-your-best goals on a simpler version of the task. Additionally, goal specificity and task complexity led to greater change in strategy over repeated performance periods, with those in the complex, specific difficult condition exhibiting the highest amount of change in strategy. Finally, there were no differences in quality of performance for indi- viduals working on simple versus complex tasks. Implications of these findings and directions for future research are discussed.