Task complexity as a moderator of goal effects: A meta-analysis.

Abstract

Much evidence exists that supports the use of goal setting as a motivational technique for enhancing task performance; however, little attention has been given to the role of task characteristics as potential moderating conditions of goal effects. Meta-analysis procedures were used to assess the moderator effects of task complexity for goal-setting studies conducted from 1966 to 1985 (n = 125). The reliability of the task complexity ratings was .92. Three sets of analyses were conducted: for goaldimculty results (hard vs. easy), for goal specificity-difficulty (specific difficult goals vs. do-best or no goal), and for all studies collapsed across goal difficulty and goal specificity-difficulty. It was generally found that goal-setting effects were strongest for easy tasks (reaction time, brainstorming), d ~ .76, and weakest for more complex tasks (business game simulations, scientific and engineering work, faculty research productivity), d = .42. Implications for future research on goal setting and the validity of generalizing results are discussed.Twenty years of empirical research has established that specific, challenging goals lead to higher levels of task performance than no goals, vague goals, or easy goals (Locke, Shaw, Saari, & Latham, 1981;Finder, 1984). Interest is now turning to identifying the theoretical limits of goal setting, for example, the variables that moderate the positive performance effects of goals (e.g., Austin & Bobko, 1984;Locke et al., 1981;Naylor & Ilgen, 1984).One variable of potential importance to the theory of goal setting is task complexity. Tasks are an integral part of all studies of human performance, and task characteristics have been suggested as moderators in a diverse range of areas, including job design (Hackman & Oldham, 1980), personnel selection (e.g., Peterson & Bownas, 1982), information processing and decision making (e.g., Streufert & Streufert, 1978), and psychomotor activities (Fleishman, 1975). Locke et al. (1981) have speculated that goals will have less direct effects due to effort, attention, and persistence on complex tasks, and that indirect effects due to strategy development will become more important to performance. Further, Wood (1985) has argued that specific, challenging goals may lead to suboptimal search procedures on complex tasks (e.g., Baumler, 1971;Huber, 1985). From this literature we hypothesize that goals, on the average, will have less pronounced performance effects on complex tasks than on simple tasks.The study of characteristics such as complexity has suffered

Unique effects of setting goals on behavior change: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

“…Encouraging people to set goals is a technique that is used widely to promote behavior change, and the present review showed a positive effect on Kleingeld, van Mierlo, & Arends, 2011; Mento, Steele, & Karren, 1987;Tubbs, 1986;Wood, Mento, & Locke, 1987). However, the present review is arguably more robust because it excluded correlational studies, included unpublished dissertations and studies that had reported a non-significant result but did not provide data.…”

“…The idea that goals should be "sufficiently difficult" is supported by evidence showing medium to large effects on behavior/ performance (the overall effect sizes found by meta-analyses range from d = .44 to d = .82) of setting difficult goals compared with setting easy goals (Chidester & Grigsby, 1984; Kleingeld et al, 2011;Mento et al, 1987;Tubbs, 1986;Wood et al, 1987).…”

“…With the exception of feedback (Chidester & Grigsby, 1984;Mento et al, 1987;Tubbs, 1986), there has been little exploration of the effect of pairing additional complementary behavior change techniques with goal setting. It is clear that there are other behavior change techniques that would increase the effectiveness of goal setting on changing behavior.…”

“…In contrast with the research reviewed above, in 6 which provision of feedback was experimentally manipulated, meta-analyses that coded for the presence or absence of feedback produced mixed results. For example, Mento et al (1987) found no effects of feedback whereas Chidester and Grigsby (1984) found strong positive effects of accompanying goal setting with feedback. …”

“…Task complexity has been the focus of two reviews, one of which found that increased task complexity decreased the effect of goals on individual performance (Wood et al, 1987). The second review found that task complexity was not a moderating factor for goals that were set for groups rather than individuals (Kleingeld et al, 2011).…”