IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jobhdp/v161y2020icp228-241.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Goal-setting reloaded: The influence of minimal and maximal goal standards on task satisfaction and goal striving after performance feedback

Author

Listed:
  • Giessner, Steffen R.
  • Stam, Daan
  • Kerschreiter, Rudolf
  • Verboon, Danny
  • Salama, Ibrahim

Abstract

When striving to meet goals, individuals monitor their progress towards achieving them. The discrepancy between their current performance and their goal determines task (dis)satisfaction, and thus whether they will make greater effort. We propose and test a theoretical extension of goal-setting theory, namely that different types of goal standards (minimal or maximal) fundamentally change this monitoring process. Through four experiments we demonstrate that with maximal goals (“ideal” standards), individuals experience greater task satisfaction the nearer their current performance comes to the goal. In contrast, with minimal goals (“at least” standards), their satisfaction level remains low, regardless of how close their performance is to the goal. When goals are exceeded, the reverse applies: with maximal goals, satisfaction remains high regardless of the level of overperformance, while with minimal goals, satisfaction is determined by the level of overperformance. We also demonstrate that task satisfaction levels influence subsequent decisions on goal striving.

Suggested Citation

  • Giessner, Steffen R. & Stam, Daan & Kerschreiter, Rudolf & Verboon, Danny & Salama, Ibrahim, 2020. "Goal-setting reloaded: The influence of minimal and maximal goal standards on task satisfaction and goal striving after performance feedback," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 228-241.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:jobhdp:v:161:y:2020:i:c:p:228-241
    DOI: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2020.08.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749597820303745
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.obhdp.2020.08.004?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Daan Stam & Robert G. Lord & Daan van Knippenberg & Barbara Wisse, 2014. "An Image of Who We Might Become: Vision Communication, Possible Selves, and Vision Pursuit," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(4), pages 1172-1194, August.
    2. Podsakoff, Philip M. & Farh, Jiing-Lih, 1989. "Effects of feedback sign and credibility on goal setting and task performance," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 45-67, August.
    3. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    4. Kluger, Avraham N. & Stephan, Elena & Ganzach, Yoav & Hershkovitz, Meirav, 2004. "The effect of regulatory focus on the shape of probability-weighting function: Evidence from a cross-modality matching method," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 95(1), pages 20-39, September.
    5. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. "Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
    6. Drach-Zahavy, Anat & Erez, Miriam, 2002. "Challenge versus threat effects on the goal-performance relationship," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 88(2), pages 667-682, July.
    7. Crowe, Ellen & Higgins, E. Tory, 1997. "Regulatory Focus and Strategic Inclinations: Promotion and Prevention in Decision-Making," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 117-132, February.
    8. Giessner, Steffen R. & van Knippenberg, Daan, 2008. ""License to Fail": Goal definition, leader group prototypicality, and perceptions of leadership effectiveness after leader failure," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 105(1), pages 14-35, January.
    9. Chen, Xiao & Latham, Gary P., 2014. "The effect of priming learning vs. performance goals on a complex task," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 125(2), pages 88-97.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kanfer, Ruth & Chen, Gilad, 2016. "Motivation in organizational behavior: History, advances and prospects," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 6-19.
    2. Botzen, W.J. Wouter & de Boer, Joop & Terpstra, Teun, 2013. "Framing of risk and preferences for annual and multi-year flood insurance," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 357-375.
    3. Anton Kühberger & Christian Wiener, 2012. "Explaining Risk Attitude in Framing Tasks by Regulatory Focus: A Verbal Protocol Analysis and a Simulation Using Fuzzy Logic," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 9(4), pages 359-372, December.
    4. Nathalie Etchart-Vincent, 2009. "Probability weighting and the ‘level’ and ‘spacing’ of outcomes: An experimental study over losses," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 39(1), pages 45-63, August.
    5. Luo, Yong (Eddie) & Wong, Veronica & Chou, Ting-Jui, 2016. "The role of product newness in activating consumer regulatory goals," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 600-611.
    6. Bischof, Severin Friedrich & Boettger, Tim M. & Rudolph, Thomas, 2020. "“Curated subscription commerce: A theoretical conceptualizationâ€," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    7. Shoji, Isao & Kanehiro, Sumei, 2016. "Disposition effect as a behavioral trading activity elicited by investors' different risk preferences," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 104-112.
    8. Boone, Jan & Sadrieh, Abdolkarim & van Ours, Jan C., 2009. "Experiments on unemployment benefit sanctions and job search behavior," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 53(8), pages 937-951, November.
    9. Jos'e Cl'audio do Nascimento, 2019. "Behavioral Biases and Nonadditive Dynamics in Risk Taking: An Experimental Investigation," Papers 1908.01709, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2023.
    10. Francesco GUALA, 2017. "Preferences: Neither Behavioural nor Mental," Departmental Working Papers 2017-05, Department of Economics, Management and Quantitative Methods at Università degli Studi di Milano.
    11. Bin Zou, 2017. "Optimal Investment In Hedge Funds Under Loss Aversion," International Journal of Theoretical and Applied Finance (IJTAF), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 20(03), pages 1-32, May.
    12. Nicholas Barberis, 2012. "A Model of Casino Gambling," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(1), pages 35-51, January.
    13. Goytom Abraha Kahsay & Daniel Osberghaus, 2018. "Storm Damage and Risk Preferences: Panel Evidence from Germany," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 71(1), pages 301-318, September.
    14. Carolin Bock & Maximilian Schmidt, 2015. "Should I stay, or should I go? – How fund dynamics influence venture capital exit decisions," Review of Financial Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(1), pages 68-82, November.
    15. Hooi Hooi Lean & Michael McAleer & Wing-Keung Wong, 2013. "Risk-averse and Risk-seeking Investor Preferences for Oil Spot and Futures," Documentos de Trabajo del ICAE 2013-31, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Empresariales, Instituto Complutense de Análisis Económico, revised Aug 2013.
    16. Paredes-Frigolett, Harold, 2016. "Modeling the effect of responsible research and innovation in quadruple helix innovation systems," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 126-133.
    17. Tetenov, Aleksey, 2012. "Statistical treatment choice based on asymmetric minimax regret criteria," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 166(1), pages 157-165.
    18. Chen, Yanyan & Mandler, Timo & Meyer-Waarden, Lars, 2021. "Three decades of research on loyalty programs: A literature review and future research agenda," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 179-197.
    19. Tomas Bonavia & Josué Brox-Ponce, 2018. "Shame in decision making under risk conditions: Understanding the effect of transparency," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(2), pages 1-16, February.
    20. Massimiliano Amarante & Mario Ghossoub & Edmund Phelps, 2012. "Contracting for Innovation under Knightian Uncertainty," Cahiers de recherche 18-2012, Centre interuniversitaire de recherche en économie quantitative, CIREQ.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jobhdp:v:161:y:2020:i:c:p:228-241. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/obhdp .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.