Goal Setting Theory
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In the recent decades, academics have revealed that monetary incentives are not sufficient in driving employee performance. Reports show that employee engagement levels remain stagnant in North American with 70% of employees being disengaged. Thus, a great amount of emphasis has been turned towards employee motivation. In this paper, the goal setting theory will be discussed. The reader will be guided through the main understandings of the theory and its relevance in the North American workplace.
Research conducted in this field has indicated that there is a positive relationship between goal setting and performance outputs. The prime principles of the goal setting theory state that successful goal setting needs to be assessed on five dimensions: goal clarity, goal challenge, goal commitment, performance feedback, and task complexity. The insights of the empirical studies discussed in this paper imply that when goal setting is done correctly and thoroughly throughout each stage, it leads to a significant increase in motivation.
Various methods and strategies have been developed to complement the goal setting theory, an example being, the popular mnemonic acronym S.M.A.R.T. which uses the words specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, and timely to aid in setting effective goals. Goal setting theory is both measurable and quantifiable. Empirical evidence from both experimental and field settings have supported that the benefits (increase in employee performance, increase in employee motivation, increase in profits, etc.) far outweigh the drawbacks (results from application error, organization costs, human resource efforts).
Based off current research output and the abundance of research still conducted and revised on this theory, it can be concluded that the goal setting theory is an effective theory of motivation and, moving forward, will be a leader in workplace motivation in North America.
INTRODUCTION
According to Gallup’s employee
In the recent decades, academics have revealed that monetary incentives are not sufficient in driving employee performance. Reports show that employee engagement levels remain stagnant in North American with 70% of employees being disengaged. Thus, a great amount of emphasis has been turned towards employee motivation. In this paper, the goal setting theory will be discussed. The reader will be guided through the main understandings of the theory and its relevance in the North American workplace.
Research conducted in this field has indicated that there is a positive relationship between goal setting and performance outputs. The prime principles of the goal setting theory state that successful goal setting needs to be assessed on five dimensions: goal clarity, goal challenge, goal commitment, performance feedback, and task complexity. The insights of the empirical studies discussed in this paper imply that when goal setting is done correctly and thoroughly throughout each stage, it leads to a significant increase in motivation.
Various methods and strategies have been developed to complement the goal setting theory, an example being, the popular mnemonic acronym S.M.A.R.T. which uses the words specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, and timely to aid in setting effective goals. Goal setting theory is both measurable and quantifiable. Empirical evidence from both experimental and field settings have supported that the benefits (increase in employee performance, increase in employee motivation, increase in profits, etc.) far outweigh the drawbacks (results from application error, organization costs, human resource efforts).
Based off current research output and the abundance of research still conducted and revised on this theory, it can be concluded that the goal setting theory is an effective theory of motivation and, moving forward, will be a leader in workplace motivation in North America.
INTRODUCTION
According to Gallup’s employee
References: 1. Bandura, Albert. Social Learning Theory. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1977. Print. 2. Bennett, D. (2009, March 15). Ready, aim... fail. Why setting goals can backfire. The Boston Globe, C1. 3. Gallup. State of the Global Workplace: Employee Engagement Insights for Business Leaders Worldwide. DC, 2011. Print. 4. Klein, H., Wesson, M., Hollenbeck, J., & Alge, B. (1999). Goal commitment and the goal-setting process: Conceptual clarification and empirical synthesis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 885–896. 5. Latham, G. P. (2004). The motivation benefits of goal setting. Academy of Management Executive, 18(4), 126-129. 6. Latham, G. P., and C. T. Ernst. "Keys to Motivating Tomorrow 's Workforce." Human Resource Management Review 16.2 (2006): 181-98. 7. Locke, Edwin A. "Goal Theory vs. Control Theory: Contrasting Approaches to Understanding Work Motivation." Motivation and Emotion: 9-28. Print. 8. Locke, E. "Toward A Theory Of Task Motivation And Incentives*1." Organizational Behavior and Human Performance: (1968). 157-89. Print. 9. Locke, Edwin A., and Gary P. Latham. A Theory of Goal Setting & Task Performance. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1990. Print. 10. Locke, Edwin A., and Gary P. Latham. "Building a Practically Useful Theory of Goal Setting and Task Motivation: A 35-Year Odyssey." American Psychologist 57.9 (2002): 705-17