Locke And Latham's Goal Setting Theory - Essay Example

LOCKE AND LATHAM'S GOAL SETTING THEORY Essay Student’s Name Instructor’s Name Course Title Date LOCKE AND LATHAM'S GOAL SETTING THEORY Goal setting can be defined as the process of motivating employees and clarifying their role perceptions by establishing performance objectives. The process of setting goals has been replicated the world over and many influential literatures in management have several proposals on goal setting. Many studies that have been conducted in different contexts, underscore the importance of setting very specific and challenging goals as it is said that this acts as a powerful way of boosting performance of an organization (Barsky, 2008). Following a series of studies, Locke and Lotham came up with what has become a very refered theory of goal setting. As such it has been rightly called the goal-setting theory. When an individual engages in the act of setting a goal, it is an indication that they are discontent with their current conditions and for this reason they seek to achieve a particular objective which they deem necessary to change their conditions to be better. Barsky (2008), states that the individuals develop an affect towards the goal that they have set which is a necessary aspect of goals acting since the goals that one sets act as the standards to gauge their satisfaction with the performance. The pursuit of goals and the realization of one’s ability to meet them creates feelings of success in the workplace (Galinsky, Mussweiler, & Medvec, 2002). It has been argued that setting of higher goals acts as motivation for an individual to work harder than moderate or vague goals do. The setting of goals coupled with the relevant skill in one's particular field of skill is arguably the best way of motivating an individual towards higher performance. This is because goals not only motivate a person to make use of their existing ability but they also pull the stored knowledge and skills to one’s awareness or even in other circumstances make an individual to get new knowledge to tackle the new task that confronts them (Drach-Zahavy & Erez, 2002). According to the theory goals can be effective even when they come from different sources or set jointly through participation. In this light, an employee who has been employed as a salesperson is bound to set goals if indeed they wish to be successful in their career as a sales person. The goals that they set may make or break their career. A manager who is helping such an employee to set their goals is going to have to look at various factors before together with the employee they are able to set realistic and achievable goals for the salesperson in question. For the goals to act as a motivation towards higher performance for the sales person, he or she must own the goals that have been set. Thus the manager will do well to consider his experience and skill in terms of sales and find out how much he or has been able to sell in their past jobs. This will be necessary in order to gauge their ability as a sales person (Barsky, 2008). This can act as a good guide as to what will be a high or difficult goal, moderate goal and vague goal. This is because all these vary with an individual’s ability. Once high but realistic goals that are achievable are set, then the salesperson is bound to achieve them. The achievement of these goals is going to result in personal gratitude and more job satisfaction which are important in instilling confidence. Thus regarding the Lock and Lotham goal setting theory, the sales person who sets hard but realistic goals is bound to get motivation once these goals are achieved. The goal setting theory also indicates that for a goal to be achieved and in turn be able to motivate an individual, there are several factors that have to be put in place. This is because the relationship between goals and performance is dependent on various factors (Bartov, Givoly, & Hayn, 2002). For example for a goal to be able to achieve the desired intent of motivation, they must have goal commitment. This is the first step which makes someone to go out of their way to carry out the tasks required so as to be able to achieve the goal. This is achieved if only the person was the one who set the goal or was directly involved in the setting of that goal. In the case of a sales person, the manager would very well to assist but it is important that the salesperson in question participates fully in the goals setting process so as to “own the goal” that is set (Earley, Connolly, & Ekegren, 1989). A goal that one participates in making is more likely to spur commitment to the individual as it triggers the sense of autonomy in the individual. This goal commitment breeds in the person the attitude of “I want to do it and I can do it.” These are very important in the achievement of any goals as they act as motivation even when the activities that one engages in seem to be a bit tougher than they were thought to be in the beginning. This act as a source of a personal motivator for the person who in our case will be the salesperson. In goal setting, another very important factor to consider is the characteristics of the task that one is working towards achieving. This is important since once evaluated it will give an indication of the complexity of the task. The complexity of the task is one of the important aspects in the determination of goal achievement as it reveals the level of knowledge that is required to accomplish the task in question (Latham & Locke, 2006). Setting a goal that requires a very high level of skill which a person cannot be able to achieve will only work negatively. This will hamper the efforts of trying to achieve the specific goals which in turn become counterproductive instead of producing the motivation needed to spur the person to higher performance. This will also give an indication of the necessary resources that will enable a person to be able to achieve the task. For one to achieve a certain goal, it goes beyond factors that are limited to them as a person in order to be successful (VandeWalle, 2001). One of the major things that one will need is the resources to be supplied as required. Setting a goal and not providing the necessary resources to enable one to able to achieve it is detrimental as the motivation that was intended to be achieved as a result of goal pursuit is not gained but instead what sets in are frustration which lead to a decrease in employee performance (Elliot & Harackiewicz, 1996). Once a goal has been set it is important to have it evaluated regularly over a certain period of time so as to be able to measure progress towards its achievement. Following each evaluation activity it is very vital that one gets feedback as to whether they are still on track. According to VandeWalle (2001), the in the goal setting theory feedback is identified as one of the key moderators in goals setting and achievement. This is because the individual who is engaged in a particular task is able to track their performance. For example in the case of the salesperson it is very important to get feedback as to whether the set goals are being achieved and if not what could be the limitations towards achieving them. When a person gets positive feedback they are bound to be inspired to work even harder since they can be able to see the fruits of their labor. On the other hand, when an individual gets negative feedback this is bound to affect him but the effects are usually based on how the message is delivered (Rawsthorne & Elliot, 1999). The main focus here should be whether the goal is being achieved or not and at the same time to identify the factors that could have been overlooked leading to the goal not being achieved. Necessary motivation is then sorted and the individual is able to get back on track. The goals that are set are supposed to meet a certain criterion for them to fit into the goal setting theory characteristic. One of the features of each goal is that it is supposed to be very specific and significant. For a goal to be useful in motivating an individual it has to be specific to the task they are setting out to engage in. This is also very useful as it enables that giving of feedback to be made easier and more specific. A goal which is specific will also be an easy one to measure which is another characteristic that each goal has to meet (Staw & Boettger, 1990). The measurable aspects of the goals are important as these are the ones that are used to provide feedback in order to ascertain whether an individual is moving in the right track towards the goal achievement. The measurable aspects of the goals also play the biggest role in the motivation of the particular individual as regards their performance. The particular goal that one sets needs to be attainable and acceptable to the person who is setting out to achieve the goal. The acceptability of the goal stems out of the participation of the person setting the goal. For the goal also to be acceptable it has to be action oriented and the skills that are required to achieve the action be in possession of the employee (Donovan & Williams, 2003). Another aspect of the goal is that of being realistic and relevant. This is following the consideration of the circumstances surrounding the task which will make the goal to be results oriented. The other major thing that has to be seen in the goal is the aspect of time which contributes to tangibility and the ability to be evaluated. Goal setting has high validity and usefulness in any work setting as it is what ensures that the objectives of the organization are achieved. However there exist some limits which emanate from the whole process of goals setting (Bell & Kozlowski, 2002). One of the major setbacks is the characteristic of goals to make the employee to focus on measurable performance of their work. This increases the risk of employee neglecting those aspects of their work that play supportive roles and are not necessarily measurable. The main motivation for employees who have set goals to achieve becomes what can be seen and later evaluated (Wiese & Freund, 2005). In the situations where the goals are tied to pay or other tangible rewards, the employees are bound to set very easy goals. The easy goals are meant to ensure that the employee is able to achieve the goal and benefit from the pay or the monetary reward that is on offer. The issue of setting goals also interferes with the learning process in new and complex jobs. This is because the employee will tend to shift their focus on the job activities so that they can engage in with a lot of ease which does not require them to acquire new knowledge (Schweitzer, Ordóñez, & Douma, 2004). The fact that goal setting is important in any organization is indisputable. The goals have to be set by the employees or through their participation so that there can be enhanced commitment to the particular goal. It is also important to ensure that the characteristics of the task are well reviewed before setting the goal in order to ensure that the employees are motivated to achieve them (Shah, Friedman, & Kruglanski, 2002). The goals that are set also need to be SMART as is required in the goal setting theory a factor which enhances their the chances of being attained and in return ensuring that the objective of enhancing performance is realized. Despite making sure that these have been effected well, the goal setting process may lead to some limitations as the employees shift their focus on the easily achievable aspects of their work in order to be able to benefit fully from the reward that emanate as a result of being able to achieve one's goals. References Barsky, A. (2008). Understanding the ethical cost of organizational goal-setting: A review and theory development. Journal of Business Ethics, 81(1), p. 63-81. Retrieved from http://proceedings.aom.org/content/2007/1/1.283.full.pdf Bartov, E., Givoly, D., & Hayn, C. (2002). The rewards to meeting or beating earnings. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 33(2), 173-204. Retrieved from http://aaahq.org/AM2001/sessions/ab084.pdf Bell, B. S., & Kozlowski, W. J. (2002). Goal orientation and ability: Interactive effects on self- efficacy, performance and knowledge, Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(3), 497–505. Retrieved from http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1008&context=hrpubs Donovan, J., & Williams, K. (2003). Missing the mark: Effects of time and causal attributions on goal revision in response to goal performance discrepancies. Journal of Applied Psychology , 88(3), 379–390. (ATTACHED IN DRAFTS SECTION) Drach-Zahavy, A., & Erez, M. (2002). Challenge versus threat effects on the goal-performance relationship. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 88(2), 667–682. Retrieved from http://iew3.technion.ac.il/~merez/papers/dz.pdf Earley, P., Connolly, T., & Ekegren, G. (1989). Goals, strategy development, and task performance: Some limits on the efficacy of goal setting. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74(1), 24-33. Elliot, A. J., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (1996). Approach and avoidance achievement goals and intrinsic motivation: A mediational analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 70(3), 461-475. Retrieved from http://www.psych.rochester.edu/research/apav/publications/documents/1996_ElliotHarackiewicz_ApproachandAvoidanceAchievementGoalsandIntrinsicMotivation.pdf Galinsky, A. D., Mussweiler, T., & Medvec, V. H. (2002). Disconnecting outcomes and evaluations: The role of negotiator focus. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(5), 1131-1140. Retrieved from http://social-cognition.uni-koeln.de/scc4/research/judgment/documents/jpsp83.pdf Latham, G. P., & Locke, E. A. (2006). Enhancing the Benefits and Overcoming the Pitfalls of Goal Setting. Organizational Dynamics , 35(4), 332-340. Retrieved from http://www.gpworldwide.com/quick/nov2006/art5.asp Rawsthorne, L. J., & Elliot, A. J. (1999). Achievement Goals and Intrinsic Motivation: A Meta- Analytic Review. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3(4), 326-344. Retrieved from http://www.psych.rochester.edu/research/apav/publications/documents/1999_RawsthorneElliot_Achievementgoalsandintrinsicmotivation.pdf Schweitzer, M. E., Ordóñez, L., & Douma, B. (2004). Goal Setting as a Motivator of Unethical Behavior. Academy of Management Journal, 47, 422-432. (ATTACHED IN DRAFTS SECTION) Shah, J. Y., Friedman, R., & Kruglanski, A. W. (2002). Forgetting all else: on the antecedents and consequences of goal shielding. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(6), p. 1261-80. Staw, B. M., & Boettger, R. D. (1990). Task revision: A neglected form of work performance. Academy of Management Journal , 33(3), p. 534-559. (ATTACHED IN DRAFTS SECTION) VandeWalle, D. (2001). Goal orientation: Why wanting to look successful doesn’t always lead to success. Organizational Dynamics, 30(2), 162-171. Retrieved from http://dvandewalle.cox.smu.edu/orgdynamics.pdf Wiese, B. & Freund, A. (2005). Goal progress makes one happy, or does it? Longitudinal findings from the work domain. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology , 78(2), p. 1-19. Read More