Predicting subsequent task performance from goal motivation and goal failure

Goal Missed, Self Hit: Goal-Setting, Goal-Failure, and Their Affective, Motivational, and Behavioral Consequences

Setting high and specific goals is one of the best-established management tools to increase performance and motivation. However, in recent years, potential downsides of goal-setting are being discussed. One possible downside is the high risk of failing the goal. In an approach to integrate research on the consequences of goal-failure and the basic assumptions of goal-setting theory, we investigated whether failure of a high and specific goal has detrimental effects on a person's affect, self-esteem, and motivation. In Experiment 1, 185 participants received fictitious feedback about attaining or failing an assigned high and specific goal. In Experiment 2 with 86 participants, we manipulated goal-failure through task-difficulty and we included task choice as a behavioral measure of motivation. In both experiments, participants who failed the high and specific goal showed a decrease in affect, self-esteem, and motivation compared to participants who attained that goal. Results indicate that failing a high and specific goal can be damaging for self-related factors that may be crucial for organizational long-term outcomes. We advise organizations to consider potential undesirable effects when using goal-setting interventions.

The effects of current unsatisfactory performance and evaluative approach on improvement expectancy and commitment to improvement

This study investigated the effects of current unsatisfactory performance (CUP) on improvement expectancy (IE) and commitment to improvement (CTI). 118 high school students were randomly assigned to consider either current satisfactory performance (CSP) or CUP. In addition, students within each group were randomly assigned to one of two evaluative approaches: (1) dichotomous present-focused evaluation (“Are you succeeding in this area? Or not?”), or (2) historical success scaling (“What is the highest level of success that you have reached in this area?”). It was hypothesised that (relative to CSP) CUP has a negative effect on improvement expectancy (IE). This hypothesis was supported. In addition, the data were consistent with an inconsistent mediation hypothesis according to which CUP has a positive direct effect on CTI but a negative indirect effect through reduced IE. The indirect effect of CUP on CTI was expected to be less negative amongst students engaging in historical success scaling than amongst students engaging in dichotomous present-focused evaluation. Although this was indeed the case, a test of moderated mediation indicated that the conditional indirect effects did not differ statistically. The study helps to illuminate the conflicting effects of CUP on CTI. Findings also have important implications for cognitive-behavioural and solution-focused approaches, both of which champion “scaling.”