|
] b [Ability, knowledge and skill
] fo [If a person has the knowledge or skills needed to complete a task, a specific high goal must be set to accomplish the task (Winters & Latham, 1996). Moreover, the ability to set a specific high-performance goal can have a strong impact on those who are high rather than low (Lock, 1965, 1982). This is because those with high skills are able to develop more strategies to achieve a goal than those without the necessary knowledge or skills.
When a person does not have the knowledge or skills needed to complete a task, Kanfer and Akkerman (1989) found that an vague goal, such as advising people to do what they can, can lead to higher results than setting a clear and high-achieving goal. This occurs when people are systematically shaken up to look for ways to achieve a goal before routinely learning different strategies to achieve the goal. Mone and Shalley (1995) repeated this finding. Focusing only on the end result prevented the goal-seeking from learning the strategies relevant to the task needed to achieve the goal.
Winters and Latham (1996) also repeated the above findings. People who were encouraged to act as best they could were superior to those who were clearly set a high goal. In contrast, those with clear and higher learning goals had the highest scores. This is because the learning goal is different from the efficiency goal because the first is to discover or master new strategies, processes, or procedures - the necessary strategies that people working on new, complex tasks may not initially master. Winters and Latham’s conclusions about the benefits of setting learning rather than a goal for tasks when people did not initially have the necessary knowledge were echoed by others. Drax-Zahavy and Erez (2002) found that individuals with a learning goal (referred to in their study as a “strategy goal”) had higher levels than those with a more complex stock market forecasting task. . Seijts, Latham, Tasa, and Latham (2004) found that those with a specific higher education goal were significantly higher than those with a market share in the interactive, computer-based simulation of the U.S. cell phone industry. - The purpose of work has been achieved. Kozlowski and Bell (2006) showed that the learning objective assigned significantly improved both the processes of both affective and cognitive self-management relative to the highly effective goal. Noel and Latham (2006) found that participants with a learning goal were able to run their simulated business much longer than their performance goal. Cianci, Klein, and Seijts (2010) reported that people with learning goals experienced less stress and followed negative feedback than individuals with low goals.
In contrast to the findings on ability as a moderator of the relationship between purpose and effectiveness, the learning objective benefits people with lower cognitive abilities. This is because people with disabilities are more likely to lack knowledge, and while the main focus of the learning objective is to increase their knowledge, the goal of the study is to increase the motivation to apply existing knowledge and skills. Therefore, although both learning and performance goals are necessary to achieve success, performance goals should be set only after the employee is able to achieve them (Seijts & Latham, 2005) - if employees find the knowledge they need if they don't. himself.
Goal setting is a powerful and effective status variable. Typical effect sizes range from .42 to .82 (Locke & Latham, 1990). In contrast, personality variables are typically correlated with a value of r .20 or less (Cohen’s d = 0.41 or less). This should not come as a surprise, as features are general and situations are specific to the task and situation. Typically, task- and situation-specific variables predict efficiency better than overall indicators if they are consistent with the outcome under consideration. The only common trait that is significantly associated with performance in many jobs and situations is intelligence (Schmidt, 2009), but intelligence is not a specific feature of an individual. Set goals usually have the effect of features because set goals create a strong situation. Perhaps “strong features” can overcome strong situations that arise as a result of defined goals, but this has not yet been demonstrated.
However, this does not mean that features and circumstances are not related to each other. Features, as we have noted, have been found to affect targets. This occurs primarily in situations where goals are not set, but are self-determined. Objectives can mediate the effect of characteristics, as specificity is usually mediated in general (Locke, 2001).
The way in which goals affect the relevance of assigned goals to action is less clear, but traits such as motivation to achieve a goal or conscientiousness can affect commitment to a goal. This is another topic for further research.
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |
