Goals in Motivation and Leadership - Essay Example

Goals in Motivation and Leadership Institution Name Introduction Goal setting is among the most influential and replicated paradigms within the management literature (van Eeden et al 2008). Several studies conducted in many countries and contexts have systematically showed that setting specific, challenging goals in leadership and motivation can positively influence organizational performance and organizational behavior (Locke & Latham, 2002). Basing on this underlying assumption, this essay argues that goals can give employees a sense of accomplishment, as a result increasing their motivation and organizational performance. Accordingly, this paper explores the importance of goals in leadership and motivation by relating them to their major theories. Several theories such as goal-setting theory, job design theory, Vroom theory, expectancy theory, equity theory and transformational leadership theory are drawn into perspective to demonstrate how goal-setting can be used to improve employee motivation and improve organizational performance, as well as leadership. They further show that leadership is not only influenced by employees, but also by leaders, so as to achieve organizational goals through change. Goals and Motivation Motivation describes the extent to which an individual exerts persistent effort with the hope of attaining a specified goal (Nader, n.d.). The effort should be defined in relation to its suitability to the goals being pursued. For success to be achieved, an employee should be willing to stay with the task until it is complete. Hence, in respect to Latham (2007) suggestion, a goal could be viewed as a regulatory mechanism for assessing, monitoring and adjusting one’s behavior. Lunenburg (2011) also defines a goal as simply what an individual is consciously attempting to do. There are two different types of goals pursued at any given time. They include organizational goals and individual goals, which may yield different outcomes if they are not compatible. Goal-setting is, in Lunenburg (2011) view, considered as a motivational technique by most behavioral scientists and executives. It is important in motivation since it directs action and attention. Additionally, it mobilizes energy, increases persistent effort and leads to higher effort. Goals motivate individuals to create strategies that will enable them perform at the expected goal levels. Achieving the goal can eventually lead to further motivation and satisfaction. However, if the goal is not attained, it can lead to lower motivation and frustration (van Eeden et al 2008). Goals influence effective organisational performance Goal-setting influences high organisational performance. This perspective is supported by goal-setting theory, which focuses on the motivational effects of targets for action or goals. Research has indicated that specific, difficult goals motivate high performance by encouraging the development of new task strategies, increasing persistence and effort and focusing attention. For instance, classic studies by Locke and Latham (2002) demonstrated that setting difficult and specific goals for 36 truck drivers moving logs led them to increase legal allowable weight from 60% to 90%, saving the company about $250,000 in less than a year. According to Locke (1996), difficult and specific goals have a high potential for yielding these effects when workers are committed to them, when tasks are easy rather than complex and when they receive feedback. Without commitment, employees question if it is worthy to work toward hard goals. Grant and Shin (2011) also argued that without feedback, workers cannot measure their progress and adjust persistence, task strategies and effort accordingly. Towards this end, effort is a major determinant of performance when tasks are simple, however, when tasks are complex, task strategies and ability becomes more influential, which lowers the performance results of goal setting as a motivational technique. Goals influence employee motivation Goal-setting can trigger improved employee motivation and job satisfaction. Basing on Job Design Theory, goals are considered significant contextual influence on motivation. The manner in which the employees’ jobs are structured has a significant effect on their motivation (Grant & Parker, 2009). According to Grant & Parker (2009), classic research on job design theory focuses on the job enrichment principle, which suggests that changing the structural characteristics of workers’ tasks to raise their motivating potential. For instance, studies have shown that when workers have a brief interaction with the ultimate user of their work, they perceive their actions as holding a greater impact and generally feel more devoted to by perceiving to have attained a goal. This motivates them to attain higher productivity and performance, as well as work harder (Grant & Parker, 2011). The prevailing approach to job enrichment is further based upon the Job Characteristics Model, which suggests that motivation, performance quality, satisfaction and withdrawal behaviors such as turnover and absenteeism are a part of three vital psychological states, namely knowledge of results, responsibility for outcomes and experienced meaningfulness (van Eeden et al 2008). Grant and Parker (2009) pointed out that job satisfaction is influenced by three core job characteristics: task identity (finishing a whole, identifiable work piece from the beginning to the end), task significance (having a great impact on other people within or outside the organization) and skill variety (being challenged to make use of a variety of one’s capabilities). From a motivational point of view, one critique about the Job Characteristics Model is that it concentrates on the enrichment of allocated tasks, overlooking the significant role played by interpersonal relationships in motivation (Grant & Parker, 2009). Goals provide employees with a sense of direction Setting goals enables employees to anticipate success. This gives them a sense of direction. According to Vroom’s Expectancy Theory, workers choose to show more commitment in tasks after they weigh through their relative utilities, or the likelihood of attaining desired results (Vroom, 1964). As demonstrated by Vroom (1964), effort is a function of three beliefs namely expectancy (effort will result in performance), instrumentality (performance will result in outcomes) and valence (these results are valued or important). These beliefs interactively determine the degree of efforts employees should put. In case any one of the beliefs misses, employees may not select a course of action. Without expectancy beliefs, workers feel that effort is in vain. Additionally, without valence and instrumentality beliefs, employees may question if their performance is worth. For instance, Rasch and Tosi (1992) incorporated elements of goal-setting, expectancy theory and desire for achievement in their analysis of the perceived functioning of software engineers. The researchers applied the characteristics of expectancy theory to measure effort and established that effort affects performance. They also showed effort is affected by goal clarity, goal difficulty and achievement of needs (Ambrose & Kulik, 1999). Goals ensure skill-matching Goals enable employees to match their skills and competences to the anticipated rewards and benefits. Equity theory takes a step toward putting motivation more straightforward in a social context. The main assumption of equity theory is that workers are motivated when their inputs such as loyalty, effort, skill, and knowledge are matched by outcomes, such as benefits, bonuses, recognition, pay. These generate a sense of fairness or equity (Grant & Parker, 2011). In which case, when outcomes do not correspond to inputs, the resulting perceptions of inequity result in distress. This motivates workers to take action to lower it (Lindner, 1998). When workers feel under-rewarded, perceived equity may be restored by reducing their inputs, seeking to raise their outcomes, aiming to reduce coworkers’ outcomes or attempting to decrease others’ inputs. However, when workers feel over-rewarded, perceived equity may be restored by increasing their inputs or cutting down their outcomes. Equity assumes that both over-rewarding and under-rewarding workers can be detrimental to motivation (Huseman et al. 1987). Even though research has consistently demonstrated negative behavioral and motivational effects of under-reward inequity, evidence shows mixed outcomes about the effects of over-reward inequity. Some workers may appear to reduce their motivation, others raise it and still others indicate no significant changes. To resolve these conflicting findings, one approach has been used, which involves understanding personal differences in equity sensitivity. Huseman et al. (1987) hypothesizes that employees can be classified into three classes of equity preferences, equity sensitive, entitled and benevolent Goals and leadership Barnett (2014) defines leadership as the process through which an individual influences others toward achieving organizational or group goals. On the other hand, goals -- as an important factor in leadership -- describe success and poses challenges at the same time. By having goals, an organization, group or individual knows what it has to do. Hence, members can work together to achieve them. In return, they contribute to the organization’s development and maintenance, enhance their operation and give members a sense of cohesion (van Eeden, et al 2008). Setting goals influences effective leadership Goal-setting gives leaders a sense of direction. Additionally, it influences effective leadership by anticipating success and challenges that leaders have to break through. This perspective is based on Bass' Transformational Leadership Theory. According to the theory, leaders can transform organizational behaviors by setting goals and conforming to the attainment of these goals to alter employee’s aspirations and perceptions, as well as values and expectations (Bass, 1996). Hence, leaders can encourage subordinates’ dedication, unquestioned loyalty and admiration, through articulating a compelling and clear goal. Transformational leadership concentrates its attention on developing mutual trust, promoting the leadership capabilities of others and setting goals that go farther than the short-term needs of the group. According to Sullivan and Decker (1997), a transformational leader is not concerned about the status quo but rather the “effective revolutionary change within the human service and organizations”. Bass (1996) clearly defines transformational leadership as a leader’s ability to motivate workers to surpass their own personal aspirations for the organization’s good. van Eeden, et al (2008) further adds that a transformational leader defines one who emphasizes interpersonal and social skills, sets long-term goals and conveys a vision to encourage others. Goal-setting assists in establishing targets and assess performance Goal-setting helps leaders establish targets and key performance indicators (KPIs). Key performance indicators are levels or numbers used to judge an individual, group or an organization’s performance (MagForLiving, 2014). KPIs and targets trigger leaders to set goals since there is no better method of judging the performance of a team. Goal-setting also enables organizational leadership to assess their performances by comparing end project outcomes to preset goals. This is supported by the transactional leadership theory, which focuses on task and role requirements and uses rewards contigent on performance (Barnett, 2014). The leader makes a clear structure that states what is needed from every member of the group. He will create a vision, sell it and lead the way. For instance, if a leader gives the sales team a goal to achieve 150 sales within a month, each member of the team will only have one thing in mind, which is to achieve sales. The member or leader of the team will at no point within the month have to lose focus on their targets. The transactional theory generally explains that the success of an organization relies on whether the leader possesses the power to make the process in which staff completes their work stronger. From McGuire & Kennerly (2006) report, transactional leaders are merely interested in preserving the “status quo” for organizations. They are known to set up performance specifications and ensure that they are achieved within a given deadline, create low employee commitment and limit the employee’s contentment. Conclusion Goals provide employees with a sense of accomplishment, as a result increasing their motivation and organizational performance. A critical process of ensuring that an organizational has the right goals is goal-setting. Essentially, goal-setting is important as it influence high organisational performance. As further established, goals trigger improved employee motivation and job satisfaction, which makes setting them crucial in any organizational setting. They also provide employees with a sense of direction, as well as enable employees to match their skills and competences to the anticipated rewards and benefits. Goal-setting influence effective leadership and assist leaders establish targets and assess their performance as well. References Ambrose, L. M., & Kulik, T. (1999). Old Friends, New Faces: Motivation Research in the 1990s. Journal of Management. Bass, B. (1996). A new paradigm of leadership: An inquiry into transformational leadership. Alexandria, VA: US Army Institute for Behavioral & Social Sciences. Barnett, T. (2014). Leadership theories and studies. Encyclopedia of Business. Grant, A. M., & Shin, J. (2011). Work motivation: Directing, energizing, and maintaining effort (and research). Forthcoming in R. M. Ryan (Ed.), Oxford handbook of motivation. Oxford University Press. Grant, A. M., & Parker, S. K. (2009). Redesigning work design theories: The rise of relational and proactive perspectives. Academy of Management Annals (vol.3, pp. 317-375). Huseman, C. R., Hatfield, D. J., & Miles, W. E. (1987). The Equity Sensitivity Construct: Potential Implications for Worker Performance. Journal of Management. Latham, P. G. (2007). Work motivation: History, theory, research, and practice. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources. Lindner, R. J. (1998). Understanding Employee Motivation. Journal of extension. Locke, A. E. (1996). Motivation through conscious goal setting. Applied & Preventive Psychology. Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (2002). Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation: A 35-year odyssey. Lunenburg,C. F. (2011). Goal-Setting Theory of Motivation. International journal of management, business, and administration. MagForLiving. (2014). Top 5 Reasons Why Setting Goals Is Important For Leaders. Retrieved from http://www.magforliving.com/top-5-reasons-why-setting-goals-is-important-for-leaders/ McGuire, E., & Kennerly, S. (2006). Nurse Managers as Transformational and Transactional Leaders. Nursing Economics (vol. 24 no.4, pp. 179-185). Nader, R. (ND). Leadership and motivation. Retrieved from http://www.ibrd.gov.nl.ca/regionaldev/lm.pdf Rasch, R. H., & Tosi, L. H. (1992). Factors Affecting Software Developers' Performance: An Integrated Approach. MIS Quarterly (vol. 16, pp. 395-413). Smith, R. (2008). Entrepreneurship, police leadership, and the investigation of crime in changing times. Journal of Investigative Psychology & Offender Profiling (vol. 5 no. 3, pp. 209-225). Sullivan, E., & Decker, P. (1997). Effective leadership and management in nursing (Ed. 4). Addison Wesley Longman, Inc. van Eeden, R., Cilliers, F., & van Deventer, V. (2008). Leadership styles and associated personality traits: Support for the conceptualisation of transactional and transformational leadership. South African Journal of Psychology (vol. 38 no. 2, pp. 253-267). Vroom, H. V. (1964). Expectancy Theory of Motivation - Victor Vroom. Read More