Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 53 views

    The Theory of Rests On The Belief That Life Is A Process of Goal-Oriented Action (Locke & Latham, 1990, 2002)

    Uploaded by

    Jonas valerio
    Goal setting theory proposes that setting specific, difficult goals leads to higher performance. However, critics argue that the theory ignores several important factors. It does not consider the effects of goal setting over different time horizons, may advocate goals that are too narrow or specific, and can cause problems if too many goals are assigned simultaneously. Additionally, unexpected undesirable consequences for employees can occur if assigned goals are not reached. More research is still needed to fully understand how goal setting impacts performance in organizational settings.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as XLSX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    The Theory of Rests On The Belief That Life Is A Process of Goal-Oriented Action (Locke & Latham, 1990, 2002)

    Uploaded by

    Jonas valerio
    53 views12 pages
    Goal setting theory proposes that setting specific, difficult goals leads to higher performance. However, critics argue that the theory ignores several important factors. It does not consider the effects of goal setting over different time horizons, may advocate goals that are too narrow or specific, and can cause problems if too many goals are assigned simultaneously. Additionally, unexpected undesirable consequences for employees can occur if assigned goals are not reached. More research is still needed to fully understand how goal setting impacts performance in organizational settings.

    Original Title

    Goals

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    XLSX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Goal setting theory proposes that setting specific, difficult goals leads to higher performance. However, critics argue that the theory ignores several important factors. It does not consider the effects of goal setting over different time horizons, may advocate goals that are too narrow or specific, and can cause problems if too many goals are assigned simultaneously. Additionally, unexpected undesirable consequences for employees can occur if assigned goals are not reached. More research is still needed to fully understand how goal setting impacts performance in organizational settings.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as XLSX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as xlsx, pdf, or txt
    53 views12 pages

    The Theory of Rests On The Belief That Life Is A Process of Goal-Oriented Action (Locke & Latham, 1990, 2002)

    Uploaded by

    Jonas valerio
    Goal setting theory proposes that setting specific, difficult goals leads to higher performance. However, critics argue that the theory ignores several important factors. It does not consider the effects of goal setting over different time horizons, may advocate goals that are too narrow or specific, and can cause problems if too many goals are assigned simultaneously. Additionally, unexpected undesirable consequences for employees can occur if assigned goals are not reached. More research is still needed to fully understand how goal setting impacts performance in organizational settings.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as XLSX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as xlsx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 12

    Theory Criticisms

    Critics have complained


    that goal setting theory has been
    1 overprescribed (Ordoñez, et al.,
    2009). Goal setting has been described
    ·         The theory of goal setting rests on as being effective for any
    the belief that life is a process of goal- type of task in any type of setting, but
    oriented action (Locke & Latham, 1990, this may not actually be the
    2002) case in organizations

    The theory has been criticized for


    advocating goals that are
    ·         Goals can be defined as a too specific or too narrow (Ordoñez, et
    al., 2009). Specific goals
    2 result that individuals try to can cause individuals to spend too
    accomplish (Locke,Shaw, Saari, & much time focusing on them
    Latham, 1981 to the detriment of other important
    organizational behaviors,
    such as innovation, creativity, and
    flexibility. More research is
    needed to uncover the influences on
    level of goal specificity on
    performance level. Staw and Boettger
    (1990) found that goals
    that are too narrow can lower
    performance levels on assigned
    tasks

    Critics of goal setting theory have


    argued that most research
    In organizations, people are has ignored a time horizon when
    motivated to direct their attention setting goals (Ordoñez, et al.,
    toward and achieve goals. Goals 2009). For example, if short-term goals
    3 are set, then managers will
    have both an internal and an
    most often only focus on short-term
    external aspect for individuals. performance at the expense
    Internally, goals are desired ends of long-term performance. Cheng,
    of achievement; externally, goals Subramanyam, and Zhang
    refer employees to an object or to (2005) found that focusing on meeting
    a condition being sought, such as only quarterly perfor
    -
    a performance level, a sale to a mance goals can result in firms not
    customer, or a promotion (Locke, investing in long-term research
    1996; Locke & Latham, 2006 and development efforts
    ·         The positive relationship
    between goal setting and task
    performance is one of the most
    4 replicable findings in the
    management and organization
    literature (Locke, Shaw,Saari, &
    Latham, 1981)

    ·         According to goal setting


    theory, the highest levels of
    performance are usually reached
    when goals are both difficult and
    specific. The more difficult a goal
    assigned to someone, the greater
    the resulting performance level.
    5 When a specific, difficult goal is
    set for employees, then goal
    attainment provides those Critics have argued that the theory has
    ignored the problems
    employees with an objective, caused by too many goals being
    unambiguous basis for evaluating assigned for task performance
    the effectiveness of their (Ordoñez, et al., 2009). Shah,
    performance (Locke & Latham, Friedman, and Kruglanski (2002)
    found that individuals tend to focus
    2006) only on one goal at a time
    when assigned multiple goals
    simultaneously

    Goals influence performance levels by


    affecting the direction
    6 of action, the degree of effort exerted,
    and the persistence of
    action over time.

    Finally, critics of the theory contend


    that there can be unexpected
    undesirable consequences for
    7 Performance has been shown to be employees when assigned
    higher when goals are goals are not reached (Ordoñez, et al.,
    higher, when people are committed to 2009). For example, when
    reaching the goal, and employees don’t reach goals they can
    when people possess the required have lower attitudes,
    ability and knowledge to achieve lower self-perceptions, and lower self-
    that goal (Locke, 1968; Locke & Latham, efficacy beliefs (Galinsky,
    2006) Mussweiler, & Medvec, 2002;
    Mussweiler & Strack, 2000
    To improve performance, help ensure
    8 that individuals are
    committed to their goals (Locke,
    Latham, & Erez, 1988).

    Goal setting has been shown to result in


    higher levels of per
    9 formance when goals are either
    assigned to individuals or when
    individuals are allowed to set goals for
    themselves (Hollenbeck
    & Brief, 1987).

    Goal setting results in the highest


    performance levels when
    10 people are given feedback about how
    well they are performing
    (Locke, 1967).

    People with high self-efficacy set higher


    11 goals for themselves
    than do people with low self-efficacy
    (Locke & Latham, 2006).

    Goal setting effects may be weaker


    depending on task complexity (Earley,
    12 1985; Jackson & Zedeck, 1982; Wood,
    Mento, &
    Locke, 1987).
    Goal setting against organizations

    Goal setting too specific against other


    important organizational behaviors,
    such as innovation, creativity, and
    flexibility.
    Critics have argued that there may
    not be a positive, linear
    relationship between goal difficulty
    and task performance as
    advocated by the theory. If goals are
    too challenging, then problems
    undesired organizational outcomes caused by too many goals being
    can occur, such as unethical assigned for task performance against
    behavior and unnecessary risk taking individuals tend to focus only on one
    in order to accomplish goals goal at a time
    (Larrick, Heath, & Wu, 2009; Ordoñez, when assigned multiple goals
    et al., 2009). simultaneously

    unexpected undesirable
    consequences for employees when
    assigned
    goals are not reached

    You might also like