Goal-Setting: A State Theory, but Related to Traits

The Wiley-Blackwell Handbook of Individual Differences

Volumn , Issue , 2011, Pages 577-587

  Latham, Gary P ^a   Ganegoda, Deshani B ^b   Locke, Edwin A ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

Author keywords

Goal orientation Dweck's (1999) theory of goal orientation stating that goal orientation, is a relatively stable disposition; Goal, an object or aim that individuals strive to attain goal setting theory; Goal setting, a powerful and effective state variable; Individual differences exception of ability, goal setting theory not taking into account individual differences in traits; Locus of control, one out of four variables in core evaluations theory as well as need for achievement and conscientiousness; Motivation and vocational interests goal setting, a state theory, related to traits; People, self administering intrinsic rewards on basis of their own appraisals of their accomplishments, in relation to their goals; Task and situation specific variables being relevant to outcome in question, predicting better performance; Trait of conscientiousness, found significant in jobs, where employees are given a lot of autonomy; Traits, being found to affect goals

Indexed keywords

EID: 84985865620     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1002/9781444343120.ch21     Document Type: Chapter

References (51)

1. Adler, S., & Weiss, H. M. (1988). Recent developments in the study of personality and organizational behavior. In C. L. Cooper & I. T. Robertson (Eds.), International review of industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 3, pp. 307-330). Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
2. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social-cognitive view. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
3. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.
4. Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The Big Five personality dimensions and job performance:A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44, 1-26.
5. Barrick, M. R., Mount, M. K., & Strauss, J. P. (1993). Conscientiousness and performance of sales representatives: Test of the mediating effects of goal setting. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 715-722.
6. Brett, J. F., & VandeWalle, D. (1999). Goal orientation and goal content as predictors of performance in a training program. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 863-873.
7. Cianci, A. M., Klein, H. J., & Seijts, G. H. (2010). The effect of negative feedback on tension and subsequent performance: The main and interactive effects of goal content and conscientiousness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95, 618-630.
8. Costa, P. T., Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual. Odessa, FL: PAR.
9. Dossett, D. L., Latham, G. P., & Mitchell, T. R. (1979). The effects of assigned versus participatively set goals, KR, and individual differences when goal difficulty is held constant. Journal of Applied Psychology, 64, 291-298.
10. Drach-Zahavy, A., & Erez, M. (2002). Challenge versus threat effects on the goal-performance relationship. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Making, 88, 667-682.
11. Dweck, C. S. (1999). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and development. Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.
12. Erez, A., & Judge, T. A. (2001). Relationship of core self-evaluations to goal setting, motivation, and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 1270-1279.
13. Graziano, W. G., & Eisenberg, N. (1997). Agreeableness: A dimension of personality. In R. Hogan, J. Johnson & S. Briggs (Eds.), Handbook of personality psychology (pp. 795-824). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
14. Higgins, E. T. (1997). Beyond pleasure and pain. American Psychologist, 52, 1280-1300.
15. Higgins, E. T. (1998). Promotion and prevention: Regulatory focus as a motivational principle. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 30, pp. 1-46). New York: Academic Press.
16. Hollenbeck, J. R., Williams, C. R., & Klein, H. J. (1989). An empirical examination of the antecedents of commitment to difficult goals. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 18-23.
17. Hollenbeck, J. R., Klein, H. J., O'Leary, A. M., & Wright, P. M. (1989). Investigation of the construct validity of a self-report measure of goal commitment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 951-956.
18. Judge, T. A., & Ilies, R. (2002). Relationship of personality to performance motivation: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 797-807.
19. Judge, T. A., Locke, E. A., & Durham, C. C. (1997). The dispositional causes of job satisfaction: A core evaluation approach. Research in Organizational Behavior, 19, 151-188.
20. Kanfer, R., & Ackerman, P. L. (1989). Motivation and cognitive abilities: An integrative aptitude treatment interaction approach to skill acquisition. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 657-690.
21. Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Bell, B. S. (2006). Disentangling achievement orientation and goal setting: Effects on self-regulatory processes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 9, 900-916.
22. Lambert, S. H., Moore, D. W., & Dixon, R. S. (1999). Gymnasts in training: The differential effects of self-and coach-set goals as a function of locus of control. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 11, 72-82.
23. Latham, G. P., & Locke, E. A. (2007). New developments in and directions for goal setting. European Psychologist, 12, 290-300.
24. Latham, G. P., & Pinder, C. C. (2005). Work motivation theory and research at the dawn of the twenty-first century. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 485-516.
25. Latham, G. P., Locke, E. A., & Fassina, N. E. (2002). The high performance cycle: Standing the test of time. In S. Sonnentag (Ed.), The psychological management of individual performance:A handbook in the psychology of management in organizations (pp. 201-228). Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
26. Lee, C., & Earley, P. C. (1992). Comparative peer evaluations of organizational behavior theories. Organization Development Journal, 10, 37-42.
27. Locke, E. A. (1965). The relationship of task success to task liking and satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 49, 379-385.
28. Locke, E. A. (1982). Relation of goal level to performance with a short work period and multiple goal levels. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67, 512-514.
29. Locke, E. A. (2001) Self-set goals and self-efficacy as mediators of incentives and personality. In M. Erez, U. Kleinbeck, & H. Thierry (Eds.), Work motivation in the context of a globalizing economy (pp. 13-26). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
30. Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (1984). Goal setting: A motivational technique that works! Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
31. Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (1990). A theory of goal setting and task performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
32. 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, 705-717.
33. Locke, E. A., Saari, L. M., Shaw, K. N., & Latham, G. P. (1981). Goal setting and task performance:1969-1980. Psychological Bulletin, 90, 125-152.
34. Mento, A. J., Locke, E. A., & Klein, H. J. (1992). Relationship of goal level to valence and instrumentality. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 395-405.
35. Meyer, R. D., Dalal, R. S., & Hermida, R. (2010). A review and synthesis of situational strength in the organizational sciences. Journal of Management, 36, 121-140.
36. Miner, J. B. (1984). The validity and usefulness of theories in emerging organizational science. Academy of Management Review, 9, 296-306.
37. Mischel, W. (1973). Toward a cognitive social learning reconceptualization of personality. Psychological Review, 80, 252-283.
38. Mitchell, T. R. (1979). Organizational behavior. Annual review of psychology, 30, 243-281.
39. Mitchell, T. R., & Daniels, D. (2003). Observations and commentary on recent research in work motivation. In L. Porter, G. Bigley, & R. Steers (Eds.), Motivation and Work Behavior (7th ed., pp. 26-44). New York: McGraw-Hill.
40. Mone, M. A., & Shalley, C. E. (1995). Effects of task complexity and goal specificity on change in strategy and performance over time. Human Performance, 8, 243-262.
41. Mount, M. K., & Barrick, M. R. (1995). The Big Five personality dimensions: Implications for research and practice in human resources management. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 13, 153-200.
42. Noel, T., & Latham, G. P. (2006). The importance of learning goals versus outcome goals for entrepreneurs. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation, 7, 213-220.
43. Schmidt, F. (2009) Select on intelligence. In E. A. Locke (Ed.), Handbook of principles of organizational behavior (pp. 3-17). New York: Wiley.
44. Schneider, B. (1985). Organizational behavior. Annual Review of Psychology, 36, 573-611.
45. Seijts, G. H., & Latham, G. P. (2005). Learning versus performance goals: When should each be used? Academy of Management Executive, 19, 124-131.
46. Seijts, G. H., Latham, G. P., Tasa, K., & Latham, B. W. (2004). Goal setting and goal orientation:An integration of two different yet related literatures. Academy of Management Journal, 47, 227-239.
47. Spiegel, S., Grant-Pillow, H., & Higgins, E. T. (2004). How regulatory fit enhances motivational strength during goal pursuit. European Journal of Social Psychology, 34, 39-54.
48. Tang, T. L. P., & Reynolds, D. B. (1993). Effects of self-esteem and perceived goal difficulty on goal setting, certainty, task performance, and attributions. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 4, 153-170.
49. Wiggins, J. S. (1996). The five-factor model of personality: Theoretical perspectives. New York:Guilford Press.
50. Winters, D., & Latham, G. (1996). The effect of learning versus outcome goals on a simple versus a complex task. Group and Organization Management, 21, 236-250.
51. Yukl, G. A., & Latham, G. P. (1978). Interrelationships among employee participation, individual differences, goal difficulty, goal acceptance, goal instrumentality, and performance. Personnel Psychology, 31, 305-323.