Goal Setting Theory Overview

Since it was first researched five decades ago, Goal-Setting theory has been the most
researched, utilized, and established theory of work motivation in the field of Industrial and
Organizational Psychology (Redmond, 2010). The theory began with the early work on
levels of aspiration developed by Kurt Lewin and has since been primarily developed by Dr.
Edwin Locke, who began goal setting research in the 1960’s. The research revealed an
inductive relationship between goal setting and improved production performance. A goal
is the aim of an action or task that a person consciously desires to achieve or obtain
(Locke & Latham 2002; Locke & Latham, 2006). Goal setting involves the conscious
process of establishing levels of performance in order to obtain desired outcomes. If
individuals or teams find that their current performance is not achieving desired goals, they
are motivated to increase effort or change their strategy (Locke & Latham, 2006).

Locke and Latham stated that "The goal setting theory was based on the premise that
much human action is purposeful, in that it is directed by conscious goals" (O'Neil &
Drillings, 1994, p.14).

The decision to set a goal results from dissatisfaction with current performance levels.
Setting a goal provides structure to direct actions and behaviors to improve the
unsatisfactory performance. Locke and Latham (2002) found a direct linear relationship
between goal difficulty, level of performance, and effort involved. The direct linear
relationship will stay positive, as long as the person is committed to the goal, has the
requisite ability to attain it, and doesn't have conflicting goals (Locke & Latham, 2006).
Locke and Latham's goal setting theory states that several conditions are particularly
important in successful goal achievement.These include goal acceptance and
commitment, goal specificity, goal difficulty, and feedback (O'Neil & Drillings, 1994). These
conditions have been extended and edited by other researchers, such as Kenneth
Blanchard and Spencer Johnson's SMART goals, which are conditions that need to be met
to make goals effective.

Goal Setting Theory Mechanisms

Goal mechanisms affect performance by increasing motivation to reach set goals (Latham,
2004). These mechanisms are those inputs that affect behavior in groups or individuals,
which serve to increase their attention to a goal, energy in pursuing a goal, persistence in
achieving a goal, and ability to strategize to reach a goal. When an individual or team can
focus their attention on behaviors that will accomplish the goal, they also divert attention
away from behaviors that will not achieve the goal. Goals energize people to expend more
effort based upon the effort expected to reach that goal (Redmond, 2010). Goals also lead
to persistent pursuit of reaching the goal by providing a purpose for that pursuit (Latham,
2004). Lastly, when a person is pursuing a goal, they will strategize the best way to meet
their goals.
Mechanism Description Example
Direct Attention Goals direct attention to In trying to become a
behaviors that will proficient airline pilot,
accomplish the goal and one would expect to train
away from the behaviors long hours in the flight
that will not achieve the simulator to achieve
goal. proficiency.
Energizing Inspiration to put out a An individual who wants
certain amount of effort. to become an airline
pilot will train to prepare
themselves on a high
level to accomplish this
goal.
Task Persistence How much time that is The individual that wants
spent on the behavior to to become an airline
achieve a goal. pilot will study hard and
train longer hours.
Effective Strategies In wanting to achieve a In trying to become an
goal the individual seeks airline pilot a person
out a way to achieve it. might look for ways or
techniques to maximize
their training.

Goal Setting Theory Conditions

There are necessary conditions that must be met to make goals effective in invoking
motivation through the above mechanisms. These conditions are goal acceptance/goal
commitment, goal specificity, goal difficulty, and feedback on progress toward the goal.

1. Goal Acceptance/Goal Commitment

Before a goal can be motivating to an individual, one must accept the goal. Accepting a
goal is the first step in creating motivation (Locke & Latham, 2002). Goal commitment is
the degree of determination one uses to achieve an accepted goal. Two primary factors
that help to enhance goal commitment are importance and self-efficacy. Self-efficacy is the
belief that one can attain their goal. Importance refers to the factors which make goal
attainment important to people, including the importance of the outcomes that they expect
as a result of working to attain a goal (Locke & Latham, 2006). These factors can be as
simple as making a public announcement about the commitment, or as complicated as a
formal program of inspirational mentoring and leadership.

Importance and self-efficacy also require acknowledgment of the benefits of personalizing

the goal. The individual must find the goal important and must believe they can achieve it
(Locke & Latham, 2006). Making the importance of the goal personal provides the
individual with the motivation to move beyond failure and maintain the path toward the
goal. Research by Erez, Earley, and Hulin (1985) indicates that participation in setting
one’s own goals result in a higher rate of acceptance. Locke and Latham determined that
when goal difficulty is held constant, performance between participatively set and assigned
goals do not differ significantly as long as the goal is accepted (Locke & Latham, 2002).
Their explanation for the discrepancy lies in the way the goal was presented. If the
objectives were explained to the participants, motivation was increased. Alternatively, if
goals were briefly administered with little explanation, motivation was lower. In other words,
the goals need to be specific, which leads us to our next condition.

Klein, Wesson, Hollenbeck, Wright, and DeShon (2001), developed a five-item scale for
assessing goal commitment. Responses are provided on a five-point Likert scale using
strongly diagree to strongly agree end-points.

Goal Commitment Scale

1 It’s hard to take this goal seriously ®

2 Quite frankly, I don’t care if I achieve this goal of not. ®
3 I am strongly committed to pursuing this goal.
4 It wouldn’t take much to make me abandon this goal. ®
5 I think this is a good goal to shoot for.
*Note: Items followed by ® indicate that the item should be reverse-scored before
analysis.

Developed by Klein, Wesson, Hollenbeck, Wright, and DeShon (2001)

2. Goal Specificity
A goal must be specific and measurable. It should answer the who, what, when, where,
why, and how of the expectations of the goal. Specificity and measurability provide an
external referent (such as time, space, increment, etc.) to gauge progress, whereas vague
“do better” goals are ambiguous and often have little effect on motivation. Removing
ambiguity allows one to focus on precise actions and behaviors related to goal
achievement. The more specific the goal, the more explicitly performance will be regulated.
Specific goals lead to a higher task performance by employees than the vague or abstract
goals (Locke & Latham, 2006). A person can set a general goal to sell more cars per
month; however, setting a goal to sell two cars per day for the next thirty days is more
specific and therefore effective. Goals without an external referent allow for a wide range of
acceptable performance levels (Locke & Latham, 2002, p. 706). In order for performance
to increase, goals must be challenging, specific, and concrete.
 Goals should be:

Conceivable ---> One should conceptualize the goal so that it is understandable clearly.

Believable---> One should believe that the goal can be reached and that other people
believe in it.

Achievable---> One should ask themselves if given their strengths and weaknesses can
they reach their desired goal (Locke, E.A, 2002)

3. Goal Difficulty
The difficulty of a goal affects the motivation and commitment of the individual impacting
performance. The basic idea is that the more challenging the goal, the more committed
and motivated the person must be, and thus the better the performance (Redmond, 2010).
The highest level of effort occurs when the task is moderately difficult and the lowest level
occurs when the task is either very easy or very hard (Locke & Latham, 2002, p. 705). An
easy goal will be perceived as an unnecessary thing to do, therefore, enthusiasm to attain
the goal will dwindle. Furthermore, goals that are too difficult come with obstacles that
often discourage motivation. For an individual it is both the perception and the reality of the
greater needs associated with a challenging goal that leads to the motivation and
commitment to exert more effort. A goal that is challenging, but attainable, can increase a
person's motivation for the task, but when given a task with the appropriate difficulty level
and specificity, how the task is established (participative or assigned) is not a
differentiating factor. Gergen and Vanourek (2009) suggest setting "BHAGs- "big, hairy,
audacious goals" - that really stretch us" (p. B03). Finding the correct balance between
ambitious but achievable is crucial in setting a goal. The figure below illustrates how
difficulty level affects motivation and performance:
Goals that are too easy or too difficult negatively affect motivation and performance. The
greatest motivation and performance is achieved with moderately difficult goals
(somewhere between too easy and too difficult).

4. Feedback
Feedback is necessary in order for goals to remain effective and retain commitment.
Without feedback people are unaware of their progression or regression and it becomes
difficult to gauge the level of effort required to pursue the goal effectively (Sorrentino,
2006). Additionally, feedback allows for individuals and teams to spot any weaknesses in
their current goals, which in turn allows modifications to be made (Smith & Hitt, 2005). It is
necessary for goals, and the people making the goals, to be flexible with them (Bennett,
2009). Feedback will be most effective when it is directed at setting more challenging goals
(Locke & Lantham, 1979, p. 75). Typically, people will increase effort and productivity when
current levels of performance may not achieve the goal. For instance, if one is half way
through the time period, yet less than half way to achieving the goal, one may increase
performance to achieve the goal. However, without feedback, one has no referent to guide
performance or achievement (Locke & Latham, 2002, p. 708). Feedback can either be
process oriented or outcome oriented. Process feedback focuses on tasks that are in
process and can affect task strategy, performance, and goal outcomes. Managements can
provide this feedback by evaluating the individuals processes taken toward the goal and
provide any feedback on changes that can be made to help the individual reach their goals
more effectively. Outcome feedback is focused on the outcome of the goal. Though
outcome feedback is less productive because it will not aid in the attainment of the goal.
(Redmond, 2011) By having feedback, an employee or individual will know that their work
is important and that their contributions are being recognized.

S.M.A.R.T. Goals
The above goal conditions for positively affecting motivation and performance have
commonly been referred to as SMART goals. Kenneth Blanchard and Spencer Johnson
first developed the SMART goal system when branching the concept of goal theory beyond
academia into the area of management and leadership (Blanchard, Zigarmi, & Zigarmi,
1985). The meanings for the of Blanchard and Spencer's SMART goals have evolved over
time and the modern definitions are represented in the figure below:
The term raising the bar is a common metaphor for setting challenging goals. Therefore,
to further explain the elements of SMART goals, an analogy of a track and field high
jumper will be used to demonstrate how raising (or lowering) the bar affects motivation and
performance. In addition, examples of SMART goals will also be generalized in a
management situation to demonstrate the various goal essentials and conditions.

S In order for goals to translate into motivation and improved performance, goals
must be specific.
A goal to just jump higher is too general. Instead, an example of a specific goal
would be to improve high jump by three inches.
A management goal to improve profits is too general. This broad goal could
 include increasing sales, reducing costs, or a combination thereof. A more specific
goal would be to increase sales by 8%.
M Goals must be measurable to be able to provide progress feedback and to know
when the goal is achieved.
Three inches (and increments below, between, and above) are both measurable
and specific in order for the high jumper to be able to gauge his progress and
achievement. Therefore, instead of the goal being improve high jump by three
inches, the jumpers goal could be to increase high jump from 64 inches to 67
inches.
Similarly, the manager can measure the progress of the sales figures to
understand how much focus and resources to dedicate to achieving the goal.
Therefore, a goal of increasing sales from $80,000 to $86,400 is more specific
and measurable than the ambiguous goal to just increase sales.
A A goal must be assignable to an individual or a group.
Because high jumping is an individual goal, the high jumper would assign this
goal to himself – or perhaps the high jumper’s coach might assign this goal to the
jumper.
In the sales example, the manager must be able to assign the goal to a specific
person or department.
R The goal must be challenging, yet realistic.
Lowering the bar for a high jumper could not realistically increase motivation nor
enhance performance. Similarly, setting a goal to raise the bar ten feet is not a
realistic or attainable goal and would therefore not positively affect motivation or
performance.
Similarly, increase sales by 300% may not be a realistic and attainable goal. By
setting goals unrealistically high, the manager may not see increased motivation
or performance in the sales team.
T In order for goals to positively affect motivation and performance, goals must be
time-related.
For the high jumper, he may set a time within three months which may provide a
realistic time frame to meet his goal. However, a time line of tomorrow may make
achieving the goal unrealistic. Similarly, before I’m forty may be a time line that is
so far into the future and lacks urgency and motivation.
A realistic time line for our manager might be by the end of next quarter.
Increasing sales by 8% by the end of the week may be too aggressive, and before
the company goes bankrupt is too vague of a time line.

When originally introduced by Blanchard, SMART goals were denoted as: Specific and
Measurable, Motivating, Attainable, Relevant and Track-able (Blanchard, Zigarmi, &
Zigarmi, 1985, p. 89-90). Over time, the SMART acronym for goals has evolved into what
they are today: Specific, Measurable, Assignable, Realistic, and Time-Related.
Specific and measurable have been split into two separate categories. The requirement
that goals be specific has been enduring in the SMART goal acronym. Motivating was
dropped from the SMART system perhaps because it is the overarching theme of goals. If
done correctly, goals will be a positive motivator and they would enhance performance.
The term attainable has had alternatives such as achievable, however, as stated above, a
goal must be accepted and have commitment in order to be achieved. As a result, the A in
SMART goals has become assignable. Relevant has widely become realistic possibly
because irrelevant goals would not be realistic and, while a goal may remain relevant,
whether a goal is realistic may depend on the time frame for achieving the goal. Track-able
is redundant to measurable and has been replaced with time-related because goals with
no deadline lack direction and urgency.

SMART goals also may be evolving into SMARTER goals with the E adopting meanings
like emotional, exciting, enthusiastic, and evaluate and R adopting terms such as
reevaluate, reassess, and reviewed often.

Research on Goal Setting Theory

Goal setting is a general theory that can be applied in a multitude of work situations.
Support for the theory comes from individual and group settings, laboratory and field
studies, across different cultures and involves many different tasks (Locke & Latham,
2002). The strongest support relates to the relationship between specific, difficult goals
and task performance. A meta-analysis performed by Tubbs (1986) supported the concept
that specific, difficult goals are positively correlated to improved performance. Other
research obtained similar conclusions and further stated that, “If there is ever to be a viable
candidate from the organizational sciences for elevation to the lofty status of a scientific
law of nature, then the relationships between goal difficulty, specificity/difficulty, and task
performance are most worthy of serious consideration” (Mento, Steel & Karren, 1987, p.
74). DeWalt et al. (2009) found a direct correlation between those who achieve set goals
and the motivation to create additional goals or add more challenging aspects to the
current goal based on feedback. Parker, Jimmieson, and Amiot (2009) found that
autonomy in the workplace improves self-efficacy which improves performance towards
reaching goals. Within this idea is the vision and structure that goal setting provides, which
helps to motivate individuals and teams to perform better and do more (Sorrentino, 2006).

Goal setting is not without its critics. Ordóñez, Schweitzer, Galinsky, & Bazerman (2009)
stated that the theory is over-prescribed and can potentially cause harm to an organization.
Care should be taken in applying goal setting due to the possible unintended side effects.
The arguments levied against the theory are not new and have been discussed by
previous researchers. For example, Ordóñez et al. (2009) argued that unethical behavior
can result from motivating employees to meet specific and challenging goals. In an effort to
reach a sales quota, salespeople may either fudge numbers or lie to customers in order to
reach their monetary goal. According to the authors, this focus on goal attainment can
actually promote unethical behavior by creating a “focus on ends rather than the means”
(Ordóñez et al., 2009, p. 12). Not only was this negative behavior addressed by Latham
and Locke, but the means to mitigate this issue were offered as well, such as offering
progressive awards toward goal attainment, organizational control systems, and an ethical
workplace culture (O'Neil & Drillings, 1994).

The preponderance of empirical research supporting goal setting theory illustrates its utility
as a method to motivate individuals and improve organizational outcomes. While some
caution may be in order, Locke and Latham (2002) argue that failures resulting from the
theory are usually due to errors in its application and can often be prevented. The subject
of human motivation is vast and complex. No single theory fully explains every aspect of
what motivates individuals to perform better.

Strengths, Benefits, Limitations and Weaknesses of Goal Setting Theory

Strengths and Benefits

Goal-setting theory is one of the most popular theories in use among I/O Psychologists
due to support provided by extensive empirical research and its relative simplicy as
compared to other theories (Locke & Latham, 2002; Redmond, 2010). Smith and Hitt
(2005) in their book, Great Minds in Management, reinforced the popularity of this theory
with their reference to a 2003 assessment of OB scholars who rated goal-setting theory
first in importance out of seventy-three management theories, validating Redmond's (2010)
claim that goal setting has had tremendous research and practitioner support. Using
techniques such as correlational, experimental and quasi-experimental design, research
studies conducted in eight countries, over time periods varying from one minute to 25
years, and using approximately 40,000 participants, yielded data to support increased
performance on over 100 different tasks, applicable to individuals as well as groups,
organizational units, and entire organizations (Redmond, 2010).

Goal setting has been found to inspire individuals and is one of the keys to self-
management (Latham, 2004) In many cases, it creates an alternative purpose for work and
provides the challenge that enables individuals to overcome even the most physically
exhausting tasks (Latham, 2004). Regardless of whether a goal requires cognitive or
physical exertion, studies have shown that the greatest ammount of effort is applied to
those that are considered more challenging (Latham, 2004). From a psychological
standpoint, a sense of pride develops from an individuals sense of improved self interest,
which may lead to better jobs and increased pay over time (Latham, 2004). By making the
commitment to set a goal and focus on its accomplishment within a specified period of
time, attention is often diverted away from activities that are considered goal-irrelevant
and people are often motivated to utilize or discover the knowledge necessary for
successful completion (Latham, 2004).

Limitations and Weaknesses

When two separate goals are set at the same time, exerting too much focus on one may
make it difficult to achieve the other (Latham, 2004). For example, if one sets quantity and
quality goals simultaneously, trying too hard for quantity may cause quality to be neglected
(Latham, 2004). However, this can be fixed by prioritizing separate goals or finding a
balance between goals directly dealing with each other. It is more important to have well
thought out goals than to have too many and not be able to follow through on any one goal
(Gergen & Vanourek, 2009).

Another limitation deals with goals and risks. During a computer game study, Knight,
Durham, and Locke (2001) found that participants who were given difficult performance
goals increased risk strategies to improve performance. Additionally, a limitation that can
occur, commonly referred to as tunnel vision, is when employees focus so intently on their
goals that they will ignore other aspects of their job (Redmond, 2010). Improper
management techniques, or the presence of inequity in the workplace (e.g.,
underpayment) can subvert the effectiveness of goal setting theory and not accounting for
an individual’s subconscious actions also provide weaknesses to the goal setting theory
(Locke & Latham, 1979, p. 80). This approach also does not account for actions motivated
by the subconscious, as the goal-setting theory focuses on cognition with no regard to the
subconscious (Redmond, 2010). On occasion, an individual can do something without
being aware of what is motivating them.

Finally, goal-setting theory focuses on how goals are realted to job performance but does
not take into account the "why" and does not account for why setting goals is linked to
performance (Redmond, 2010).

Practical Solutions (Locke, E.A. 2002)

Simplifiy Goals

List all the resources

Assign a manager to manage the goals of the employees
Breakdown the goal into bite-sizes (making it easier to attain)
Discuss any red flags or possible conflicts
Agree to a timeline for the goal
Follow-Up

Meet weekly with the team members

Schedule time to review goals
Follow up informally on goals in conversations or e-mail
Use e-mails as reminders
Delegate follow ups to other associates who are strong in coaching area
Coach

Support 360 degree coaching

Provide challenges by using 3 elements of effective coaching i.e. observing, modeling
 behavior and following up.

Application of Goal Setting Theory in the Workplace

Goal setting is widely used in the workplace as a means to improve and sustain work
performance. Goal setting theory is based on the assumption that behavior reflects an
employee’s conscious goals and intentions. Consequently, the expectation is that
employee efforts and performance within an organization will be influenced by the goals
assigned to or selected by these employees. In the workplace, successful managers use
the goal setting theory to clarify expectations, improve performance, and develop
employees into stronger workers, which in turn makes the company stronger (Fried &
Slowik, 2004). Some of the ways managers use this theory are:

Include employees in goal setting

Set individual goals that flow directly from those of the work unit
Set specific goals
Ask supervisors to set their own goals
Have meetings with employees regularly regarding performance and progress on
developmental objectives
Provide ongoing feedback and coaching
Have employees take the lead in both setting goals and the review process
Ensure that goals are focused on areas that are important to current and future goals
Align reward systems with desireable results
Some reward systems that are used for employees reaching their goals are:

Monetary rewards
Job and career related rewards
Recognition and pride related
Social enhancements
Status elevation
Time off
A popular application of the goal setting theory in the workplace is management by
organization (MBO) (Redmond, 2010). The process arrived independently from the goal
setting theory but joined forces with the theory in the late 1900’s through management
practice (Miner, 2007). MBO focuses on a joint determination by subordinate and superior
goals, major areas of responsibility, and result expectations. These are the measures used
to determine employee contribution and operations of the organization. While there are
notable key steps in MBO, the theory varies between organizations and from theorist to
theorist. Some of these differences include: setting objectives, working towards goals, and
reviewing performance. MBO is not an individual effort, rather it is an essential
collaboration of employees and managers to actively participate in the goal-setting process
and the “how to” of reaching their goals. MBO consists of three stages, which begins with
setting specific and measurable goals, managers monitoring the success toward reaching
the goals and offering feedback, and lastly, reviewing and evaluating the results. Like any
other method, MBO has its positive and negative aspects. Diversity in decision-making is
positive because it allows for decisions that are specific and fit the organization. A negative
aspect of MBO is that the motivating effects of difficult goals are susceptible to dissipation
over time, even when individuals are most responsive to them (Miner, 2007). However,
even with the negatives, after a review of many studies on MBO, Locke and Latham
(1990a) conclude, “the overall MBO success rate hovers around the 90% success rate
obtained for micro-and group-level studies".

Examples of Goal Setting in the Workplace

General Electric (GE) successfully applies goal setting theory in all levels of the
organization, not just on the departmental and individual level. GE successfully
implements goal setting theory on an organizational level by making the idea behind goal
setting part of their vision/mission statement: “Help us set goals for ourselves and for our
GE businesses” (GE.com, 2009). Throughout their annual Citizenship Report, Our Actions
(2005), it refers to the concept of goal setting. They summarize their goal setting initiatives
as a recipe for success for all companies and capitalism. GE sets goals for all aspects of
organizational life, reviews those goals regularly, putting systems in place to reach those
goals, and continually seeking to improve processes and set challenging goals for all
employees. For these reasons it is a wonderful example of the goal setting theory in the
workplace.

The Federal Express Company tried a form of goal setting that was called 360 degree goal
setting. In this form of goal setting, supervisors are asked to write goals for their
subordinates after they receive input from them. The goals are written for each employee
after input from internal and external sources. The main objects of this type of goal setting
is a more complete understanding of expectations of employees and customers. There is a
pledge for twenty-four hour response to email and phone messages, a two hour response
to emergency calls, a bimonthly meeting with the employees and a semiannual training
session on topical subjects. After trying this method with the human resource department,
Federal Express found that the pros outweighed the cons. The only true con was that it
took time to train the employees and managers on this new system. However, the pros that
they established from it were greater accountability for the employees' performance, clear
expectations for the employees, precise measurement of and feedback on performance
goals. After the trial run, Fed Ex then began implement this goal setting into other
departments (Milliman, Zawacki, Chulz, Wiggins, & Norman, 1995).

Team Goals
Teamwork and collaborative assignments have begun to rise within organizational
configuration. As a result, managers have changed how they understand and practice goal
setting. Team goals function similarly to individual goals, but there are unique
complications that make goal setting in a team environment more complex. For example, in
order for individuals' efforts to be directed toward team performance the team goal must
first be accepted by that individual. However, the individual dynamic within team
environments can cause personal goals to compete with team goals. This competition has
the ability to cause discord within the team and misdirect performance. In order to facilitate
team goal setting and monitoring of team performance relative to team and organizational
goals, managers have begun utilizing electronic dashboards. These applications enable
real time performance tracking by the users and also ensure that team goals are aligned
with the organization’s forecast. Dashboards also aid in providing feedback to teams,
enabling them to easily review their performance compared to the team goal (DeShon,
Kozlowski, Schmidt, Milner, & Wiechmann, 2004).

References

Bennett (2009, March 15). Ready, aim... fail. Why setting goals can backfire. The Boston
Globe, C1.

Blanchard, K., Zigarmi, P., & Zigarmi, D. (1985). Leadership and the one minute manager:
Increasing effectiveness through situational leadership. New York, NY: William Morrow and
Company.

DeWalt, D.A., Davis, T.C., Wallace, A.S., Seligman, H.K., Bryant-Shilliday, B., Arnold, C.L.,
Freburger, J., & Schillinger, D. (2009). Goal setting in diabetes self-management: Taking
the baby steps to success. Patient Education and Counseling, 77, 218-223.

DeShon, R.P., Kozlowski, W.J., Schmidt, A.M., Milner, K.R., & Wiechmann, D. (2004).
Multiple-goal, multilevel model of feedback effects on the regulation of individual and team
performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 1035-1056.

Erez, M., Earley, P. C., & Hulin, C. L. (1985). The impact of participation on goal
acceptance and performance: A two-step model. Academy of Management Journal, 28(1),
50-66. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/pss/256061

Fried, Y., & Slowik, L. H. (2004). Enriching goal-setting theory with time: An integrated
approach. Academy of Management Review, 29(3), 404-422. Retrieved October 3, 2009,
from ABI/INFORM Global. (Document ID: 657136811).

GE: Our Company. (2009). Retrieved on February 20, 2010 from

http://www.ge.com/company/index.html

Gergen, C., & Vanourek, G. (2009, January 14). Properly set goals aid success. The
Washington Times, B03.

Klein, H.J. Wesson, M.J., Hollenbeck, J.R., Wright, P.M., & DeShon, R.D. (2001) The
assessment of goal commitment: A measurement model meta-analysis. Organizational
Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 85(1), 32-55.

Knight, D., Durham, C.C., & Locke, E.A. (2001). The relationship of team goals, incentives
and efficacy to strategic risk, tactical implementation and performance. Academy of
Management Journal, 44(2), 326-338.

Latham, G. P. (2004). The motivation benefits of goal setting. Academy of Management

Executive, 18(4), 126-129.

Latham, G. P., & Locke, E. A. (2006). Enhancing the benefits and overcoming the pitfalls of
goal setting. Organizational Dynamics, 35(4), 332-340. Retrieved October 3, 2009, from
ABI/INFORM Global. (Document ID: 1155267231).

Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (2006). New directions in goal-setting theory. Current
Directions in Psychological Science, 15(5), 265-268. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8721.2006.00449.x

Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (2002). Building a practically useful theory of goal setting
and task motivation: A 35-year odyssey. American Psychologist, 57(9), 705-717.

Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (1990a). A theory of goal setting and task performance.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (1979). Goal setting-A motivational technique that works.
Organizational Dynamics, 8(2), 68-80.

Mento, A. J., Steel, R. P., & Karren, R. J. (1987). A meta-analytic study of the effects of
goal setting on task performance: 1966-1984. Organizational Behavior and Human
Decision Processes, 39(1). 52-83. Retrieved October 3, 2009, from ABI/INFORM Global.
(Document ID: 1252720)

Milliman, J. F., Zawacki, R. A., Schulz, B., Wiggins, S., & Norman, C. A. (1995). Customer
service drives 360-degree goal setting. Personnel Journal, 74(6), 136-141. Retrieved
October 3, 2009, from ABI/INFORM Global. (Document ID: 6680775).

Miner, J.B. (2007). Organizational behavior 4: From theory to practice. Armonk, NY: ME
Sharp.

O'Neil Jr., H.F., & Drillings, M. (Eds.). (1994). Motivation: Theory and research. Hillsdale,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Ordóñez, L., Schweitzer, M., Galinsky, A., & Bazerman, M. (2009). Goals gone wild: The
systematic side effects of over-prescribing goal setting. HBS Working Paper, 09-083.
Retrieved October 1, 2009, from
http://opimweb.wharton.upenn.edu/documents/research/Goals_Gone_Wild.pdf

Our Actions. (2005). GE 2005 Citizenship Report. General Electric Company, Fairfield,
Connecticut. Retrieved on February 20, 1020 from
http://www.ge.com/files_citizenship/pdf/GE_2005_citizen_05rep.pdf

Parker, S.L., Jimmieson, N.L., & Amiot, C.E. (2009). The stress-buffering effects of control
on task satisfaction and perceived goal attainment: An experimental study of the
moderating influence of desire for control. Applied Psychology: An International Review,
58(4), 622-652.

Peters, T. (1988). Thriving on chaos: Handbook for a management revolution. New York,
NY: Harper Perennial.

Redmond, B. F. (2010). Goal-Setting theory: What am I trying to achieve in my work? Work

Attitudes and Motivation. The Pennsylvania State University World Campus/

Smith, K.G., & Hitt, M.A. (2005). Great minds in management: the process of theory
development. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Sorrentino, D.M. (2006). The seek mentoring program: An application of the goal-setting
theory. Journal of College Student Retention, 8(2), 241-250.

Tubbs, M. E. (1986). Goal-Setting: A meta-analytic examination of the empirical evidence.

Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(3), 474. Retrieved October 3, 2009, from ABI/INFORM
Global. (Document ID: 1152883).

Child Pages (2) Hide Child Pages | Reorder Pages

Page: fall 2011 goal case study
Page: Goal Setting Case Study

Goal Setting Case Study

Skip to end of metadata

Attachments:4
Added by BRIAN FRANCIS REDMOND, last edited by CRAIG ROBERT WELLS on Feb 22,
2011 (view change)
Go to start of metadata

Overview/Introduction

According to Jones and George's book "Contemporary Management" (2007), the goal-setting theory
focuses on identifying the types of goals that are most effective in producing high levels of
motivation and performance and explaining why goals have these effects. Each goal set forth by a
person is a resemblance of what they are trying to accomplish through their actions and behaviors.
Without one's efforts, their goals cannot be set or accomplished. The harder the specific goal to
achieve, the more likely one would be motivated and dedicate their best performance to achieving
the desired goal.
Details of Case

John, a member of the senior management staff at Lowe's, was given a Professional Development
Plan (PDP), in order to maximize his potential as part of the management team of his store. The
goal of the PDP was to ensure that the store was maintaining excellent customer service and
improving company and store sales. The PDP would allow John to look at each individual section
(self-development, department development, and store performance) to see where he needed to
improve to achieve standards set forth by the Lowe's corporate office. The plan was built on goal-
setting theory and included education on how to create S.M.A.R.T. goals to ensure focused changes
could be implemented to improve the success of his store. Half-way through the year, John would
report his status to his supervisors. If John was able to meet the goals he had established, new goals
would be created. If the goals were not met by that time, a more in depth look would be taken to see
what changes may be needed to be able to accomplish those goals.

John realized that if his store was going to be successful, he would first need to take a look at
himself to see if he was reaching his maximum potential. Therefore, John decided to first focus on
self-development. He knew that the store would not run efficiently if he was not a successful
manager. John knew through his years of being a manager that his crew relied on him for
encouragement, attitudes, dependability, etc. John also knew that his employees' morale often
reflected his own morale while at Lowe's. For each department to be successful, constant
improvements needed to be made. John felt the success of each department would have a
trickledown effect and enhance the success of the store. Lastly, John had to improve his customer
service and store sales to make the store's overall performance better. Improving in these three areas
would give his Lowe's store a more successful outlook.

Analysis

John began to research goal-setting theory and learned that for goals to be successful as motivators
there are several factors that are necessary (Redmond, 2011). First, there must be acceptance and
commitment to the goal. Second, the goals must be specific in their language and must be directly
related to a specific end result. Third, they must be difficult enough to pose a challenge but not too
difficult that they cannot be achieved. Fourth, there needs to be feedback on when and how the goal
was achieved. The acronym used in goal-setting theory to make certain that goals affect these four
factors is S.M.A.R.T. John now needs to develop S.M.A.R.T. goals to apply this theory to the self-
development, department development, and the store performance sections of the Professional
Development Plan. John learned that the S.M.A.R.T. acronym meant that his goals needed to meet
the following criteria:
(Image Source Page: SMART)

As John continued to read more about each specific section of the S.M.A.R.T. goals, he decided to
relate them to the way he felt about his current position and ways he can improve himself and his
store to make his store better.

Self Development

First, John took a look at the two questions off of the PDP under self -development "What must I
stop doing to be a more successful manager?" and "What must I continue to do well to be more
successful?" Then he went to each specific category to see how he could relate that to the two
questions.

Specific:

With goal specificity, John, as a manager can give his employees some control in this area.
Different departments might have different, specific goals. Specific goals would include:
Increasing the sales of a certain department over last year's sales. (This information is available
through weekly reporting of the company.); have a month pass with zero on-the-job injuries; higher
rates of positive customer feedback; lower absenteeism/tardiness.

By giving his employees the autonomy to set their own goals, John will "ensure that the goals are
not unreasonable" (Redmond, 2011)

Measurable:

Through the sales monitoring, attendance, number (or lack of) on the job injuries and customer
feedback are all measurable factors that could be measured within targeted goals. When John
applies his questions, he can determine the following:

"What must I stop doing to be a more successful manager?"

Through his measurements, he can see what areas might need to be addressed. Actions he may
need to stop are any scheduling habits that make it difficult for employees to be punctual or he
might need to stop worrying about sales for a short period of time to address customer feedback.
When he addresses customer feedback, he may improve sales. By stopping certain things that might
impede not only his performance but his employees' performance as well as sales outcome(s), he
can be more successful.

"What must I continue to do well to be more successful?"

John's can use measurements to compare his store's success with other stores and national
benchmarks to identify areas that he is excelling in and he should evaluate each goal to make
certain he will be able to continue to measure those items and make certain that he doesn't set new
goals that would distract from current success areas.

Attainable:

By giving his employees the freedom to set goals (and in turn would make him a more successful
manager), he must find goals that can be reasonably be achieved. While the employees may give
him feedback on whether or not the goals are realistic, he must ensure that the goals are difficult but
not too difficult that would cause a drop in commitment. "When commitment to a difficult goal
lapses, performance would be expected to level off or decrease" (Redmond, 2011). He then can
analyze their goals in order to set his goals and make them attainable. He would help his employees
set goals, and then set his own goals to become a better manager and give himself more motivation.
John will need to evaluate his own as well as his employee's competency in each area to make
certain the goals set can be achieved.

Realistic:

As in the attainable part of the goal, letting his employees set realistic goals, John can in turn set
realistic and attainable goals. Although it is important for John to set himself a certain degree of
difficulty in his goals to have a higher motivation and "higher the performance" (Redmond, 2011),
it is also just as crucial that he is realistic. By evaluating his goals on a month to month basis, he
can visualize more realistic goals and more successful outcomes.

Timely:

John's goals as well as the goals his employee's assist in setting must be related to a specific time-
frame. Setting goals within specific time frames also allows for periodic evaluation to see where he
stands and how much further he needs to go, and what step is next. If he applies the two questions
("What must I stop doing to be a more successful manager?" and "What must I continue to do well
to be more successful?") to the timely aspect, he can evaluate and target a specific time frame that
he must stop doing that is interfering with his success as well as what he should continue to do to be
more successful.

With feedback from customers as well as employees, he would be able to weed out what he might
need to stop doing, what he needs to continue to do and ensure success in his goals

Store Performance

John was to apply the S.M.A.R.T. theory concept to this part of the PDP and see what goals can be
set to increase the performance of the Lowe's store he is in charge of managing. The questions
listed on the PDP under store performance included:"How can I improve overall store sales?" "How
can I improve average ticket?" "What can I do to impact customer service?" and "What can I do to
improve employee engagement?" He looked at each category to see how they could be defined
using the S.M.A.R.T. theory.

Specific:

John decided that he needed to give his employees a chance to be involved within the company to
make them feel like part of the team. While research has not necessarily shown that employee
improves motivation John decided that having the employees involved would give them a sense of
belonging. He hoped that this sense of belonging would improve the morale of the employees and
in turn improve customer service. John set himself a goal to have monthly team meetings where the
staff could give input on ideas they may have to improve Lowe's. John set a goal to develop a
program that would allow each employee to learn more about their department so that they could
better assist customers and know what the customers want and need when shopping within his
particular store.

Measurable:

John was taught that if a goal is not measurable, it cannot be achieved (Reis, 2010). This is why
John was going to review the team meetings after three months to see if the employees were
inputting any ideas they have and how successful it was at carrying out those ideas. He would also
learn as each meeting went on if the employees felt like they had input, if more and more input was
given as the meetings went on. The team that was in charge of putting together the program about
each department would return to the same employees within three months to see if their knowledge
of their department has improved as well.

Attainable:

In order for the goals to be attainable, they must be assigned to a specific person or group capable of
achieving that goal. The team meetings were going to be assigned to John himself since he was in
charge of all the employees and he knew the best ways to improve their morale and receive their
inputs. He assigned the tasks of "department knowledge" to a team of ten people who would ensure
that each department received the knowledge, training, and expertise in their department.

Realistic:

The two main goals set forth for store performance were realistic because they could actually
happen. They were not goals that would turn people away due to the lack of interest.

Timely:

John set the time line to review each goal's progress in three months. This would allow him time to
see if the goals were attainable or needed to be changed. John had a year to complete and work on
the PDP. Allowing three months to see the progress would still give him ample time to change the
goals if these specific goals were not working to improve the store performance.

A proven method of maximizing your success in setting and achieving goals is to set SMART goals.

Department Development

The guidelines given to aid him in developing S.M.A.R.T. goals for department development were
the questions: How can I improve Attachment Rates? How can I improve Shrink Loss? What can I
do to improve Specialty Sales?

Specific:

For the Department Development, John sets specific goals to be achieved. The goals to be achieved
include:

-Absenteeism and tardiness in each department to decrease by 50%. With documentation for those
who violated the policy.
-Positive customer feedback for each department to rise by 20%.

-Employee meeting attendance 100%.

-Each department sales increase by 3-5% than previous "quarter" (previous three months.)

Measurable:

John will measure these Department Development goals as listed:

-Absenteeism/tardiness will be measured by counts of days absent, counts total hours tardy per
department each month.

-Customer feedback measured as positive or negative every 4-8 weeks

(Depending on amount of each individual department's amount of feedback)

-Meetings will be held once a quarter (3 months), attendance will be measured

Per department. Meetings are important for communication between

Departments and management.

-Departments' sales measured by, obviously their sales totals, and will be compared to last year's
sales

same month, for sales growth.

Attainable:

Through achievability, each department's goals will have the factor that John is comparing each
department's sales, absenteeism, feedback, etc. rather than comparing them as total combined.

Realistic:

Realistically, John has set attainable goals for the departments individually and as a whole. By
doing so, it will help him realistically achieve his goal of becoming a better supervisor. Through his
pragmatic goals and measurements, the department will have a very positive development as well as
outcomes.

John will be able to develop "project objective...work plans and implementation strategies
consistent with departmental goals" (Indiana University) as well as be able to rationally
"accomplish his goals "in a specified time frame," follow through and resolve "problems in a timely
manner to keep project on track" (Indiana University).

Timely:

John will be able to "resolve problems in a timely manner to keep project on track" (Indiana
University). With his goals having a time-frame kept in mind (measurements per so many weeks,
months, quarters, etc.), a timely execution of succeeding will be practicable as well as very possibly
successful.

(Image Source Page: [http://lowesjobapplication.net/|http://lowesjobapplication.net/])

Applying Goal Setting Theory

Goal setting theory is probably the best supported theory of work motivation and one of the best-
supported management theories overall. Research convincingly shows that specific, difficult and
employee accepted goals will lead to higher levels of performance than easy, vague, or nonexistent
ones (Werner & DeSimone, 2009). The basic premise of goal setting theory is that there is a
positive linear relationship between a specific high goal and task performance (Latham & Locke,
2007). In other words having a specific target goal will increase the level of performance, effort,
and motivation in that employee. The goal--performance relationship is strongest when people are
committed to their goals (Locke & Latham, 2002).

An organizational application of goal setting theory that is widely used is an intervention called
Management by Objectives (MBO) which combines employee participation in the goal setting
process with closely measured results toward achieving each specific goal. “In its broadest
construction it is seen as a planning and control system which is designed to encourage self-control
over an individual’s work while assuring that managers’ efforts are aligned with the overall
organizational goals and priorities” (Poister & Streib, 1995) The importance of participative goal
setting has not been shown to significantly impact motivation. “From a motivational perspective,
an assigned goal is as effective as one that is set participatively provided that the purpose or
rationale for the goal is given” (Locke & Latham, 2002).

In this case study Lowe's was using an MBO system as an approach to directing an organization
through strategic goal setting. They utilized a list of questions to direct their managers to the goals
of the company and hoped this would guide their managers in developing goals to meet their overall
objectives. The specific questions contained within the PDP directed the manager to focus on three
specific areas of development to target goal setting. Self development, department development,
and store development. According to goal-setting theory The managers were then given the tools to
develop goals that were SMART.

Conclusion

John has set himself up to succeed, the goal setting plan he has set forth will allow him to measure
the success he is striving to achieve for the growth of his company. His S.M.A.R.T Goals meet the
criteria that are needed to be successful. The challenges that John has set forth within his PDP urge
his employees to work hard toward a goal and involve them on the decision making for
improvements. In order to increase motivation the employees not only need to be allowed to
participate in the goal setting but be challenged as well. Not only has John requested his employees
partake in the developing of the goals but they have made the goals clear and pointed. Locke and
Latham (2002) stated that the mangers who urge their employees just by asking them to “do their
best” will not do so. They go on to state that individuals need to have a clear expectation of the
goals at hand, in turn they will focus their efforts to accomplish these goals.

The Goal Setting Theory is becoming more of a norm in today's society. Larger companies are
finding it useful to motivate their managers and teams to higher levels. It is a theory that is easy to
use and easy to follow. With today's technology it makes the process very simple to follow, each
company can set up email reminders to update you S.M.A.R.T Goals, they can provide you with the
correct paperwork and supply the tools you may need to succeed in the position. The largest factor
in being successful is the internal motivation that one has to succeed and follow the goals as they
have set forth.

"Nothing can stop the man with the right mental attitude from achieving his goal; nothing on
earth can help the man with the wrong mental attitude."

- Thomas Jefferson http://www.affirmations-for-radical-success.com/goal-setting-theory.html

References

Falkow, K. (n.d.). Communication objectives that help and those that don't. Retrieved February 17,
2011, from Account Planning Methods: ; confessions.blogspot.com/2011/01/two-kinds-of-
communication-objectives.html

Indiana University. (n.d.). Performance Managment. Retrieved February 19, 2011, from Define
performance standards for each duty:
http://www.indiana.edu/~uhrs/training/performance_management/define.htm

Jones, G. &. George, J. (2007). Contemporary Management. New York, NY: McGraw Hill/Irwin.

Latham, G. P., & Locke, E. A. (2007). New Developments in and Directions for Goal-Setting
Research. European Psychologist , 290 - 300.

Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (2002). Building a Practically Useful Theory of Goal Setting and
Task Motivation: A 35-Year Odyssey. American Psychologist , 705 - 717.

Locke, E. A., Shaw, K. N., Saari, L. M., & Latham, G. P. (1981). Goal Setting and Task
Performance: 1969 - 1980. American Pscyhological Association.

network-marketing-mlm-success-system.com. (n.d.). smart goal settings. Retrieved February 17,

2011, from network-marketing-mlm-success-system.com: http://www.network-marketing-mlm-
success-system.com/smart-goal-setting.html

Poister, T. H., & Streib, G. (1995). MBO in municipal government: Variations on a traditional
management tool. Public Administration Review , 48 - 56.

Reis, J. (2010). Setting SMART Goals. Retrieved February 20, 2011, from
http:/learnthat.com/2010/03/setting-smart-goals

Time Management. (n.d.). Goal Setting Theory. Retrieved February 20, 2011, from network-
marketing-mlm-success-system.com

University of Pennsylvania. (2007). Performance and Staff Development Program Guidelines.

Retrieved February 22, 2011, from Penn Human Resources:
http://www.hr.upenn.edu/staffrelations/performance/guidelines.aspx#allstaffcompetency

Werner, J. M., & DeSimone, R. L. (2009). Human Resource Development. Mason, OH: Cengage
Learning.

fall 2011 goal case study

Skip to end of metadata

Added by RHIANNON NICOL JENSEN, last edited by CHELSIE MARIE COHEN on Oct 04,
2011 (view change)
Go to start of metadata

Goal Setting "A Case Study"

Employees in a large retail store were suffering from lack of motivation. On one particular
shift, there had always been some team members that would be shrinking while others had to
pick up the slack to get the job done. This would then cause the team members that were
performing their job properly to become upset and not motivated because nothing was
happening to the team members that were not working as hard. There was clearly a
disconnect between what was expected out of all employees and what was actually being done.

Jim and Carrie always worked hard to fulfill the requirements of the job. They would stock
their share of cases and the work load for the shift was still high even after they did their
share. They noticed that Patty and Brian spent more time doing other things than stocking
their share of cases for their shift.

Soon Jim and Carrie were becoming less motivated to work so hard because they felt they
were just picking up the other co-workers slack. The performance levels began to fall for all
the employees on the shift and something had to be done. The company would be losing
money because then all team members would become unmotivated. The problem that the
company was trying to solve was to be able to evaluate each team member to determine their
case stocking efficiently. The company had to create a situation that would motivate all the
team members to work to their full potential and motivate the team members to perform
more efficiently.

The Strategy
The company began to use a strategy called SMART goal setting. This strategy is an acronym
that breaks down into these factors for successful goal setting.

S-Specific: Goals must be specific. What is expected?

M-Measurable: Goals have to be measurable for feedback.

A-Assignable/ Attainable: the Tasks for the goal must be assignable and achievable.

R-Realistic: Are the abilities and skills available to achieve this goal

T-Time Sensitive: Without a deadline we are less motivated. Time limits create challenge and
produce more effort and structure. (Richmond, 2011)

The following is a summary of the SMART goal strategy given to correct the problem.

S-Each team member has to increase their case stocking. The company installed a tracking
system to allow the management to see how many cases each team member stocked during
their shift. The specific goal was to increase the number of cases per hour a stocking team
member would stock to the company average of 52 CPH (cases per hour).

M-This was measured by the new system putting a number of cases and time that each team
member worked. It was then reported back to management who then has to have one on one
meetings with each team member not achieving the company goals. At the start of the
program we had to sit down with each team member and tell them what their current CPH
was and then what we expected out of them.

A-Each team member was given their own assignment for the day so that we were able to tell
exactly how many cases each team member was given. All group projects were taken away
and assigned out into individual parts.

R-The goal of 52 CPH was researched and tested in many stores and situations where it was
given to the company. We also were to post the name and CPH that the most productive team
member hit for the day so it was know that the CPH we were looking for could be achieved.
Also during the one on one meetings at the beginning of the program we offered retraining
and coaching to help each team member.

T-We were to give watch team member feedback daily. This was shown by posting the top
performing team member each day. Management also began to have one on one feedback
sessions for those who were not able to achieve the goals in order to diagnose the problems
and to find solutions that might improve the employees performance.

The Outcome
At first the SMART strategy worked quite well. Carrie and Jim saw that the others were
motivated and it boosted their efforts back to where they were before. They were not only
working harder but felt better about it as well. They enjoyed the challenge, they knew they
could achieve it and the feedback was excellent. Brian and Patty did very well in the
beginning as well. There was a huge increase in production and sales within our stores. The
team members that were working hard before loved the program because they felt they were
acknowledged for their behavior and they knew the others that were not completing
their tasks were unable to continue creating more work for them.

The Problem
It didn't take long before the CPH for the employees on that shift began to decrease again. It
seemed that the great SMART goal setting plan was beginning to show flaws. It was noticed
that Patty found ways to cheat the system by distorting her reports on CPH for her shift. The
company again had to find a way to create more excitement and energy for Patty. She seemed
to lack commitment to the goal.

Another issue arrived soon after the implementation of SMART. The retail stores profits fell
well below average for the first time. It was learned that those that were highly motivated
such as Jim and Carrie were forgetting the other aspects of their job.

It seemed that the employees were focusing all their efforts and focus on attaining the goals set
with the company CPH that they spent less attention on customers.

The Solution
To solve this the company tried to monitor the sales floor more as managers and coach in the
moment for both good and bad behaviors. Another practice the company worked on is
prioritizing.

Management also incorporated sales into their daily feedback. Employee's sales goals were
created and tracked daily. At the end of every shift managers had one on ones with employees
to discuss their overall performance, from stocking, to sales per hour. This detailed focus on
specific employee behaviors helped turn around the performance of Patty and Brian because
they accepted their goals and felt that the goals were challenging enough to keep them
involved throughout their shift. The feedback that was provided gave them clear expectations
and also served as a constant reminder of how they were doing.

For Jim and Carrie it was a easy fix for management. They both were motivated to do an
exceptional job at work, but with the switch to the SMART system they felt that the company
was clearly putting more emphasis on the stocking and the shift function aspect of the job.
Once management began to track sales and re-aligned their feedback to incorporate sales
goals, both Jim and Carrie had improved their sales dramatically. For Jim and Carrie there
was simply a lack of goal specificity. Once they understood how important their sales goals
were to the company their performance increased.
For all of the employees, in order to make sure that they were really connected with their goal, the
company used a scale of compilled questions directly concerning the goals. The employees
discussed their individual goal with the management in the one-on-one sessions and were given the
scale and told to be honest with their answer, that way if they were not willing or did not feel able to
achieve the goal that the company could look into changing goals on an individual and company
wide basis.

Goal Commiment Scale.

1 It’s hard to take this goal seriously.

2 Quite frankly, I don’t care if I achieve this goal or not.

3 I am strongly committed to pursuing this goal.

4 It wouldn’t take much to make me abandon this goal.

5 I think this is a good goal to shoot for.

(Heslin, Carson, and VandeWalle, pg. 3)

______________________________________________________________
Reference:
Heslin, Peter A. , Jay B. Carson, and Don VandeWalle. "Practical Applications of Goal-Setting
Theory to Performance Management ." Goal-Setting Theory . N.p., n.d. Web. 3 Oct. 2011.
<pheslin.cox.smu.edu/documents/Goal%20Setting%20During%20Perf%20Management
%20Chapter.pdf>.

Richmond, Annett (2011) A better way to track your progress. Career Intelligence. Retrieved
September 30th, 2011 from, http://www.career-intelligence.com/management/SmartGoals.asp