before_revision: Research has examined goal orientation as a motivation variable that is useful for recruitment, climate and culture, performance appraisal, and choice.DeGeest, D., & Brown, K. G. (2011). The role of goal orientation in leadership development. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 22(2), 157-175. Studies have also used goal orientation to predict sales performance, adaptive performanceStasielowicz, L. (2019). Goal orientation and performance adaptation: A meta-analysis. Journal of Research in Personality, 82., goal setting, learning and adaptive behaviors in training, and leadership. Historical perspective Dweck proposed that there are two types of goal orientation: learning orientation and performance orientation.Dweck, C.S. (1986). Motivational processes affecting learning. American Psychologist, 41, 1040-1048. Dweck postulated that children with learning goals were believed to approach situations to master the acquisition of new skills, while children with performance goals were believed to approach situations to gain approval from peers and teachers. Like Eison, Dweck conceptualized goal orientation as a two-dimension construct. Individuals with a learning goal orientation (sometimes referred to as mastery goal orientation; abbreviated as LGO) seek to develop their competence by acquiring new skills and mastering new situations. They are not concerned about their performance relative to others, but rather with furthering their understanding of a given topic or task.Hendricks, J.W., & Payne, S.C. (2007). Beyond the Big Five: Leader goal orientation as a predictor of leadership effectiveness. Human Performance, 20, 317-343. Individuals with a performance goal orientation seek to demonstrate and validate the adequacy of their competence to receive favorable compliments while avoiding negative judgments. Although Dweck's work in this area built on the foundation laid by Nicholls, the fundamental difference between the two scholars' works was the attribution of an individual's goal orientation: Nicholls believed that the goal orientation held by an individual was a result of the possession of either an internal or external referent, while Dweck considered the adoption of a particular goal orientation to be related to the theory of intelligence held by that individual. Subsequent work by Eison and colleagues in 1982 led to a change in the conceptualization of these orientations from two ends of a continuum to two separate constructs.Eison, J.A., Pollio, H., & Milton, O. (1982). LOGO II: A user's manual. Knoxville: University of Tennessee, Learning Research Center. More recently, researchers have embraced the idea that individuals can adopt the two orientation styles simultaneously: persons can be independently high or low in learning and performance orientations. Ultimately, individuals can entertain multiple competing goal orientations at the same time, and strive to both outperform competitors and improve their performance. This line of thinking led to the conceptualization of two separate continua: one for learning goal orientation and one for performance goal orientation.Eison, J. A., Pollio, H., & Milton, O. (1986). Educational and personal characteristics of four different types of learning- and grade-oriented students. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 11, 5467. State versus trait There has been great debate as to whether goal orientation should be operationalized as a state or as a trait. Throughout the goal orientation literature, there are inconsistencies about the conceptualization of the stability of the construct. For example, DeShon & Gillespie stated that in the literature, DeShon, R. P., & Gillespie, J. Z. (2005). A motivated action theory account of goal orientation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(6), 1096-1127. goal orientation has been conceptualized as a trait, quasi-trait, and state. They states that whether researchers conceptualize goal orientation as a trait or a state "depends on the breadth of the inference that the researcher is attempting to support". State goal orientation refers to the goal one has in a particular situation . It is similar to trait goal orientation in that it represents one's preference in an achievement situation. Button, Mathieu, & Zajac take an integrative view of the construct,Button, S. B., Mathieu, J. E., & Zajac, D. M. (1996, July). Goal orientation URLanizational research: A conceptual and empirical foundation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 67(1), 26-48. stating that goal orientation is best categorized as a relatively stable individual difference variable that can be influenced by situational and contextual characteristics. They found that when few situational cues are present, individuals will adopt their dispositional goal orientations. However, when "dispositional goal orientations predispose individuals to adopt particular response patterns across situations, situational characteristics may cause them to adopt a different or less acute response pattern for a specific situation". Therefore, trait and state goal orientations interact, and both should be considered simultaneously. Types Since the realization that performance goal orientation is most effectively split into two separate parts, researchers have conducted validation studies to demonstrate the statistical and conceptual distinction of three dimensions to goal orientation. Conceptual and empirical work by Elliot and Church and VandeWalle demonstrated that the factor structure of goal orientation lends itself to three distinct dimensions as summarized below .Elliot, A. J. Church, M. A. (1997). A hierarchical model of approach and avoidance achievement motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 218-232. An explanation of the learning-approach and learning-avoidance goal orientations are also included for completeness. Antecedents Throughout the goal orientation literature, many studies have examined relationships between goal orientation and various antecedents. These antecedents have been identified to have varying levels of importance. In a meta-analysis by Payne et al., both the need for achievement and the Big Five personality traits were identified as important antecedents of goal orientation, while cognitive ability was found to have almost no relationship with goal orientation. The following sections go into more detail about each antecedent. Payne and her colleagues did not distinguish between proximal and distal antecedents. Another factor to consider when examining the relationship between goal orientation and goal setting is the level of inherent complexity in the situation or task. In situations with more complex tasks, it appears that "do your best" goals may lead to higher performance than specific goals. It is possible that in complex tasks, a specific, difficult goal imposes greater cognitive demands on employees, making it difficult for them to learn the complex task due to this increased pressure.Latham, G.P & Seijts, G.H. (1999). The effects of proximal and distal goals on performance on a moderately complex task. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 2, 81-127. Kanfer and Ackerman found that in an air traffic controller simulation (a highly complex task),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. performance-outcome goals interfered with acquiring the knowledge necessary to perform the task, and individuals performed better when they were asked to do their best, suggesting that adopting a learning orientation may be appropriate for complex tasks or in specific settings. However, it may be possible to set a specific, difficult learning goal. Latham and Brown found that when MBA students set specific, difficult learning goals such as mastering complex course material,Latham, G. P. Brown, T. C. (2006). The effect of learning vs. outcome goals on self-efficacy and satisfaction in an MBA program. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 55, 606-623. they outperformed MBA students who set a performance goal for GPA. Locke and Latham claim that creating a specific, difficult learning goal in this type of situation facilitates meta-cognition which is particularly helpful in complex environments with limited guidance, such as in an MBA program. Organizational outcomes Goal orientation has also been linked URLanizational outcomes, specifically job performance. Payne et al. found that individuals with high levels of trait and state LGO and low levels of trait APGO had better job performance, that PPGO was unrelated to performance, and that LGO predicted job performance above and beyond both cognitive ability and the Big Five personality characteristics. Their findings suggest that LGO is a valuable predictor of job performance and it may be in the best interest URLanizations to create a climate in which learning is valued over performance.
after_revision: Research has examined goal orientation as a motivation variable that is useful for recruitment, climate and culture, performance appraisal, and choice.DeGeest, D., & Brown, K. G. (2011). The role of goal orientation in leadership development. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 22(2), 157-175. It has also been used to predict sales performance, adaptive performanceStasielowicz, L. (2019). Goal orientation and performance adaptation: A meta-analysis. Journal of Research in Personality, 82., goal setting, learning and adaptive behaviors in training, and leadership. Historical perspective Dweck proposed that there are two types of goal orientation: learning orientation and performance orientation.Dweck, C.S. (1986). Motivational processes affecting learning. American Psychologist, 41, 1040-1048. Dweck postulated that children with learning goals were believed to approach situations to master the acquisition of new skills, while children with performance goals were believed to approach situations to gain approval from peers and teachers. Like Eison, Dweck conceptualized goal orientation as a two-dimension construct. Individuals with a learning goal orientation (sometimes referred to as mastery goal orientation; abbreviated as LGO) seek to develop their competence by acquiring new skills and mastering new situations. They are not concerned about their performance relative to others, but rather with furthering their understanding of a given topic or task.Hendricks, J.W., & Payne, S.C. (2007). Beyond the Big Five: Leader goal orientation as a predictor of leadership effectiveness. Human Performance, 20, 317-343. Individuals with a performance goal orientation seek to demonstrate and validate the adequacy of their competence to receive favorable compliments while avoiding negative judgments. Although Dweck's work in this area built on the foundation laid by Nicholls, the fundamental difference between the two scholars' works is the attribution of an individual's goal orientation: Nicholls believed that the goal orientation held by an individual was a result of the possession of either an internal or external referent, while Dweck considered the adoption of a particular goal orientation to be related to the theory of intelligence held by that individual. Subsequent work by Eison and colleagues in 1982 led to a change in the conceptualization of these orientations from two ends of a continuum to two separate constructs.Eison, J.A., Pollio, H., & Milton, O. (1982). LOGO II: A user's manual. Knoxville: University of Tennessee, Learning Research Center. More recently, researchers have embraced the idea that individuals can adopt the two orientation styles simultaneously: individuals can be independently high or low in learning and performance orientations. Ultimately, they can entertain multiple competing goal orientations at the same time, and strive to both outperform competitors and improve their performance. This line of thinking led to the conceptualization of two separate continua: one for learning goal orientation and one for performance goal orientation.Eison, J. A., Pollio, H., & Milton, O. (1986). Educational and personal characteristics of four different types of learning- and grade-oriented students. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 11, 5467. State versus trait There has been debate as to whether goal orientation should be operationalized as a state or as a trait. Throughout the goal orientation literature, there are inconsistencies about the conceptualization of the stability of the construct. For example, DeShon & Gillespie stated that goal orientation has been conceptualized as a trait, quasi-trait, and state. DeShon, R. P., & Gillespie, J. Z. (2005). A motivated action theory account of goal orientation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(6), 1096-1127. They assert that whether researchers conceptualize goal orientation as a trait or a state "depends on the breadth of the inference that the researcher is attempting to support". State goal orientation refers to the goal one has in a particular situation , and is similar to trait goal orientation in that it represents one's preference in an achievement situation. Button, Mathieu, & Zajac take an integrative view of the construct,Button, S. B., Mathieu, J. E., & Zajac, D. M. (1996, July). Goal orientation URLanizational research: A conceptual and empirical foundation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 67(1), 26-48. stating that goal orientation is best categorized as a relatively stable individual difference variable that can be influenced by situational and contextual characteristics. They found that when few situational cues are present, individuals adopt their dispositional goal orientations. However, when "dispositional goal orientations predispose individuals to adopt particular response patterns across situations, situational characteristics may cause them to adopt a different or less acute response pattern for a specific situation". Therefore, trait and state goal orientations interact, and both should be considered simultaneously. Types Since the realization that performance goal orientation is most effectively split into two separate parts, researchers have conducted validation studies to demonstrate the statistical and conceptual distinction of three dimensions to goal orientation. Conceptual and empirical work by Elliot and Church and VandeWalle demonstrated that the factor structure of goal orientation lends itself to three distinct dimensions .Elliot, A. J. Church, M. A. (1997). A hierarchical model of approach and avoidance achievement motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 218-232. An explanation of the learning-approach and learning-avoidance goal orientations are also included for completeness. Antecedents Many studies have examined relationships between goal orientation and various antecedents. These antecedents have been identified to have varying levels of importance. In a meta-analysis by Payne et al., both the need for achievement and the Big Five personality traits were identified as important antecedents of goal orientation, while cognitive ability was found to have almost no relationship with goal orientation. The following sections go into more detail about each antecedent. Payne and her colleagues did not distinguish between proximal and distal antecedents. Another factor to consider when examining the relationship between goal orientation and goal setting is the level of inherent complexity in the situation or task. In situations with more complex tasks, "do your best" goals may lead to higher performance than specific goals. It is possible that in complex tasks, a specific, difficult goal imposes greater cognitive demands on employees, making it difficult for them to learn the complex task due to this increased pressure.Latham, G.P & Seijts, G.H. (1999). The effects of proximal and distal goals on performance on a moderately complex task. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 2, 81-127. Kanfer and Ackerman found that in an air traffic controller simulation (a highly complex task),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. performance-outcome goals interfered with acquiring the knowledge necessary to perform the task, and individuals performed better when they were asked to do their best, suggesting that adopting a learning orientation may be appropriate for complex tasks or in specific settings. However, it may be possible to set a specific, difficult learning goal. Latham and Brown found that when MBA students set specific, difficult learning goals such as mastering complex course material,Latham, G. P. Brown, T. C. (2006). The effect of learning vs. outcome goals on self-efficacy and satisfaction in an MBA program. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 55, 606-623. they outperformed MBA students who set a performance goal for GPA. Locke and Latham claim that creating a specific, difficult learning goal in this type of situation facilitates meta-cognition which is particularly helpful in complex environments with limited guidance, such as in an MBA program. Organizational outcomes Goal orientation has also been linked URLanizational outcomes, specifically job performance. Payne et al. found that individuals with high levels of trait and state LGO and low levels of trait APGO had better job performance, PPGO was unrelated to performance, and LGO predicted job performance more accurately than both cognitive ability and the Big Five personality characteristics. Their findings suggest that LGO is a valuable predictor of job performance and it may be in the best interest URLanizations to create a climate in which learning is valued over performance.
edit_actions: R
edit_actions: Studies have also used goal orientation
edit_actions: It has also been used
edit_actions: clarity
edit_actions: clarity others clarity
edit_actions: R
edit_actions: was
edit_actions: is
edit_actions: fluency
edit_actions: fluency others fluency
edit_actions: R
edit_actions: persons
edit_actions: individuals
edit_actions: clarity
edit_actions: clarity clarity style
edit_actions: R
edit_actions: individuals
edit_actions: they
edit_actions: clarity
edit_actions: clarity style clarity
edit_actions: D
edit_actions: great
edit_actions: clarity
edit_actions: clarity clarity style
edit_actions: R
edit_actions: in the literature,
edit_actions: goal orientation has been conceptualized as a trait, quasi-trait, and state.
edit_actions: meaning-changed
edit_actions: meaning-changed meaning-changed coherence
edit_actions: R
edit_actions: goal orientation has been conceptualized as a trait, quasi-trait, and state. They states
edit_actions: They assert
edit_actions: clarity
edit_actions: coherence clarity clarity
edit_actions: R
edit_actions: . It
edit_actions: , and
edit_actions: coherence
edit_actions: coherence others coherence
edit_actions: D
edit_actions: will
edit_actions: clarity
edit_actions: coherence clarity clarity
edit_actions: D
edit_actions: as summarized below
edit_actions: coherence
edit_actions: coherence clarity coherence
edit_actions: R
edit_actions: Throughout the goal orientation literature, many
edit_actions: Many
edit_actions: clarity
edit_actions: clarity clarity clarity
edit_actions: D
edit_actions: it appears that
edit_actions: clarity
edit_actions: clarity coherence clarity
edit_actions: D
edit_actions: that
edit_actions: clarity
edit_actions: clarity coherence clarity
edit_actions: D
edit_actions: that
edit_actions: coherence
edit_actions: coherence others fluency
edit_actions: R
edit_actions: above and beyond
edit_actions: more accurately than
edit_actions: clarity
edit_actions: clarity others clarity