Three laboratory experiments were conducted to test eight hypotheses derived from the Goal-Energy-Effort Requirement Theory of Work Motivation. Each of the hypotheses tested in these experiments was supported. Increases in Task Goal Level, in Perceived Effort Requirement, in Energy Potential, and in Task Goal Specificity were found to result in increases in task performance. Increases in Task Goal Commitment increased the closeness of the performance level to the Task Goal Level. Statistically significant interactions were not found among the independent variables. In general, the experimental results support the hypotheses. The implications of the results for the manager are briefly discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AtkinsonJ. W.Towards experimental analysis of human motivation in terms of motives, expectancies, and incentives. In AtkinsonJ. W. (Ed.), Motives in fantasy, action, and society. Princeton, NJ: Van Nostrand, 1958. Pp. 288–305.
2.
AtkinsonJ. W.An introduction to motivation. Princeton, NJ: Van Nostrand-Reinhold, 1964.
3.
BlumenfeldW. E.LeidyT. E.Effectiveness of goal setting as a management device: research note. Psychological Reports, 1969, 24, 24.
4.
BraceyH. J.SanfordA.Basic management: an experience-based approach. Dallas, TX: Business Publ., 1977.
5.
CampbellJ. P.DunnetteM. D.LawlerE. E.WeickK. E.Managerial behavior, performance, and effectiveness. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1970.
6.
CooperM. R.WoodM. T.Effects of member participation and commitment in group decision making on influence, satisfaction, and decision riskiness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1974, 59, 127–134.
7.
FrenchJ. R.KayE.MeyerH. H.Participation and the appraisal system. Human Relations, 1966, 19, 3–19.
8.
IvancevichJ. M.McMahonJ. T.A study of task-goal attributes, higher order need strength and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 1977, 20, 552–563.
LathamG. P.BaldesJ. J.The practical significance of Locke's theory of goal setting. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1974, 60, 122–124.
11.
LathamG. P.KinneS. G.III. Improving job performance through training in goal setting. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1974, 59, 187–191.
12.
LathamG. P.LockeE. A.Increasing productivity with decreasing time limits: a field replication of Parkinson's law. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1974, 60, 524–526.
13.
LathamG. P.MitchellT. R.DossettD. L.Importance of participative goal setting and anticipated rewards on goal difficulty and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1978, 63, 163–171.
14.
LathamG. P.SaariL. M.The effects of holding goal difficulty constant on assigned and participatively set goals. Academy of Management Journal, 1979, 22, 163–168.
15.
LathamG. P.YuklG. A.Assigned versus participative goal setting with educated and uneducated wood workers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1975, 60, 299–302.
16.
LockeE. A.Toward a theory of task motivation and incentives. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1968, 3, 157–189.
17.
LockeE. A.BryanJ. F.The effects of goal-setting, rule-learning and knowledge score on performance. American Journal of Psychology, 1966, 79, 451–457.
18.
LockeE. A.BryanJ. F.Performance goals as determinants of level of performance and boredom. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1967, 51, 120–130.
19.
LockeE. A.BryanJ. F.Goal setting as determinants of the effect of knowledge of score on performance. American Journal of Psychology, 1968, 81, 398–407.
20.
LockeE. A.BryanJ. F.KendallL. M.Goals and intentions as mediators of the effects of monetary incentives on behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1968, 53, 104–121.
21.
LockeE. A.CartledgeN.KnerrC. S.Studies of the relationship between satisfaction, goal setting and performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1970, 5, 135–158.
22.
LockeE. A.CartledgeN.KoeppelJ.Motivational effect of knowledge of results: a goal-setting phenomenon. Psychological Bulletin, 1968, 70, 474–485.
23.
LondonM.OldhamG. R.Effects of varying goal types and incentive systems on performance and satisfaction. Academy of Management Journal, 1976, 19, 537–546.
24.
MentoA. J.CartledgeN. D.LockeE. A.Maryland vs Michigan vs Minnesota: another look at the relationship of expectancy and goal difficulty to task performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1980, 25, 419–440.
25.
MotowidloS. J.LoehrV.DunnetteM. D.A laboratory study of the effects of goal specificity on the relationship between probability of success and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1978, 63, 172–179.
26.
PritchardR. D.CurtsM. I.The influence of goal setting and financial incentives on task performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1973, 10, 175–183.
27.
StedryA. C.KayE.The effect of goal difficulty on performance: a field experiment. Behavior Science, 1966, 11, 459–470.
28.
VroomV. H.Work and motivation. New York: Wiley, 1964.
29.
WoffordJ. C.A goal-energy-effort requirement model of work motivation. Academy of Management Review, 1979, 4, 193–201.
