Les recherches de psychologie industrielle/organisationnelle (I/O) sur les objectifs et l’autoregulation ont prospere durant les trois dernieres decennies. Inities par le travail fecond de Locke, Latham et de leurs collegues qui ont souligne l’influence positive d’objectifs elairs et sollicitants sur les performances, de nombreux courants de recherche sont apparus pour etudier a la fois les determinants et les consequences des objectifs et des processus d’autoregulation sur les conduites et les variables dependantes relatives au travail (voir par exemple Locke, Shaw, Saari, & Latham, 1981; Vancouver, 2000 pour une revue de questions). Vancouver et Day (2005) constatent que si les chercheurs en organisations ont tente d’evaluer la validite externe et criterielle, ils se sont moins interesses a la validite interne et de construction des variables-cles et de concepts tels que les objectifs, la retroaction, la divergence et l’efficacite personnelle. Dans le meme ordre d’idees, Vancouver et Day (2004) concluent que les validations des interventions I/O fondees sur la perspective objectif/autoregulation detectent generalement des effcts positifs, mais que ces travaux sont insuffisants pour determiner les dimensions specifiques du processus objectif/autoregulation qui sont en rapport avec l’amelioration de la performance. Dans ce court article, j’aborde ces problemes concemant la recherche sur les objectifs et l’autoregulation d’un triple point de vue: le progres scientifique, les applications et les buts des investigations I/O.
Over the past three decades, industrial/organisational (I/O) research on goals and self-regulation has flourished. Beginning with the seminal work by Locke, Latham, and their colleagues showing the positive influence of difficult and specific goals on task performance, multiple streams of research have emerged to investigate both the determinants and consequences of goals and self-regulation processes on work-related behaviors and outcomes (see, e.g. Locke, Shaw, Saari, & Latham, 1981; Vancouver, 2000, for reviews). In a review of this work, Vancouver and Day (2005) suggest that although organisational researchers have sought evidence for external and criterion-related validity, less attention has been given to the construct and internal validity of key variables and concepts, such as goals, self-efficacy, feedback, discrepancy, and self-efficacy. In a related vein, Vancouver and Day (2005) conclude that although I/O intervention studies based on the goal/self-regulation perspective show generally positive effects, such studies are insufficient for understanding how specific aspects of the goal/self-regulation process relate to enhanced performance. In this short note, I consider these concerns about goal/self-regulation research in I/O psychology from three perspectives: (1) scientific progress, (2) applications, and (3) the goals of I/O research.
[1]
E. A. Locke,et al.
Goal setting and task performance: 1969–1980.
,
1981
.
[2]
A. Bandura.
Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency.
,
1982
.
[3]
P. Ackerman.
A theory of adult intellectual development: Process, personality, interests, and knowledge
,
1996
.
[4]
R. Schulz,et al.
Developmental regulation in adulthood: Selection and compensation via primary and secondary control
,
1998
.
[5]
Hugo M. Kehr,et al.
MACQUARIE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT MGSM WORKING PAPERS IN MANAGEMENT INTEGRATING IMPLICIT MOTIVES, EXPLICIT MOTIVES, AND PERCEIVED ABILITIES: THE COMPENSATORY MODEL OF WORK MOTIVATION AND VOLITION
,
2005
.
[6]
E. A. Locke,et al.
What Should we do About Motivation Theory? Six Recommendations for the Twenty-First Century
,
2004
.
[7]
Jeffrey B. Vancouver,et al.
Industrial and Organisation Research on Self‐Regulation: From Constructs to Applications
,
2005
.
[8]
Cornelius J. König,et al.
Integrating Theories of Motivation
,
2006
.