A Meta-Model of the Effects of Goal Characteristics, Feedback, and Role Characteristics in Human Organizations

Abstract

Recent literature reviews have attempted to link goal-setting processes with other traditional human relations topics, possibly in a search for explanations of the inconsistent results among some empirical studies. The present reformulation builds upon the models developed in these literature reviews by offering more specific propositions regarding the variables in these models and by integrating these variables with three other organizational themes: participative management, job design and role theory. The model offered here is a meta-model because it is an integration of variables and concepts from several other models. Eleven propositions regarding the direct effects of goal characteristics, feedback, and role characteristics and eleven corollaries regarding the moderating effects of personal and job characteristics are presented.

Effects of self‐esteem and gender on goal choice

“…The second major finding, that high esteem participants chose more difficult goals than did low esteem participants, supports goal setting theory (cf. Beehr and Love, 1983;Hall and Foster, 1977;Hollenbeck and Klein, 1987) and early speculations with respect to level of aspiration (cf. Himmelweit, 1947;Lewin et al, 1944).…”

“…In fact, we would predict that self-efficacy would be a better predictor of goal choice than self-esteem for a particular task. Our goal here was to explore the models and propositions set forth by Hall and Foster (1977), Beehr and Love (1983), and Hollenbeck and his colleagues (Hollenbeck and Brief, 1987;Hollenbeck and Klein, 1987) regarding the general nature of self-esteem and goal level. It was also our intention in the design of this study to obtain results that would be generalizable across tasks and situations.…”

“…Although there is considerable support for the expectancy-value framework of goal choice (Campbell, 1982), a variety of other factors may affect the levels of these variables. For instance, Beehr and Love (1983) have suggested that personality characteristics such as higher order need strength may act as moderators. Also, Locke et al (1981) and Campbell (1982) have suggested that individual differences such as locus of control and self-esteem may influence goal choice.…”

“…Hall and Foster, 1977) the proposed linkage is between esteem and goal commitment, Hollenbeck and his colleagues (Hollenbeck and Brief, 1987;Hollenbeck and Klein, 1987) suggest that self-esteem operates as a link to goal choice as well. Beehr and Love (1983) put forth a series of propositions and corollaries which constitute their meta-model of the effects of goal characteristics, feedback, and role characteristics in organizations. They suggest in one of the corollaries (i.e.…”

Stage of Task Learning as a Moderator of the Goal-Performance Relationship

“…Under conditions of low acceptance, a negative relationship existed between goal difficulty and performance. Given this potentially confounding effect, this hypothesis will be tested, statistically controlling for the influence of goal acceptance, as suggested by a number of researchers (Beehr & Love, 1983;Campion & Lord, 1982;Dossett, 1981;Earley, 1985;Hollenbeck & Klein, 1987;Latham & Yukl, 1975;Locke, 1968;Locke, Cartledge, & Knerr, 1970;Locke et al, 1981;Steers & Porter, 1974).…”