Goal orientation: effects on backing up behavior, performance, efficacy, and commitment in teams.

The author examined the predictive validity of goal orientation in teams on both team process and outcome variables. Results indicate that when mean goal orientation scores were used as a way of describing team members' inputs, learning orientation was related to backing up behavior, efficacy, and commitment. The relationships between performance orientation and efficacy and commitment, however, were more complex and were clarified when task performance was also taken into account. Performance orientation had a negative effect on efficacy when task performance was low and a positive effect on commitment when task performance was high. The implications of these findings for theory and research on goal orientation in teams and team staffing are discussed.

[1]  S. Kozlowski,et al.  Multilevel Theory, Research, and Methods in Organizations: Foundations, Extensions, and New Directions , 2000 .

[2]  Daniel R. Ilgen,et al.  Laboratory Research: A Question of When, Not If. , 1985 .

[3]  L. Porter,et al.  The Measurement of Organizational Commitment. , 1979 .

[4]  M. Riggs,et al.  The impact of perceived group success-failure on motivational beliefs and attitudes: a causal model. , 1994, The Journal of applied psychology.

[5]  Daniel R. Ilgen,et al.  Backing up behaviors in teams: the role of personality and legitimacy of need. , 2003, The Journal of applied psychology.

[6]  Bradley L. Kirkman,et al.  Beyond Self-Management: Antecedents and Consequences of Team Empowerment , 1999 .

[7]  S. Gully,et al.  Role of goal orientation, ability, need for achievement, and locus of control in the self-efficacy and goal--setting process. , 1997 .

[8]  E. Salas,et al.  Team performance assessment and measurement , 1997 .

[9]  Neal Schmitt,et al.  Personality and work : reconsidering the role of personality in organizations , 2003 .

[10]  S. Gully,et al.  A Multilevel Application of Learning and Performance Orientations to Individual, Group, and Organizational Outcomes , 2005 .

[11]  J. McGrath.  Groups: Interaction and Performance , 1984 .

[12]  Kara A. Incalcaterra,et al.  A meta-analysis of team-efficacy, potency, and performance: interdependence and level of analysis as moderators of observed relationships. , 2002, The Journal of applied psychology.

[13]  Steven P. Brown,et al.  The Influence of Goal Orientation and Self-Regulation Tactics on Sales Performance: A Longitudinal Field Test , 1999 .

[14]  C. Cooper,et al.  International review of industrial and organizational psychology , 1986 .

[15]  Gilad Chen,et al.  The role of different levels of leadership in predicting self- and collective efficacy: evidence for discontinuity. , 2002, The Journal of applied psychology.

[16]  R. Mcintyre,et al.  A Conceptual Framework for Teamwork Measurement , 1997 .

[17]  D. Feltz,et al.  Perceived team and player efficacy in hockey. , 1998, The Journal of applied psychology.

[18]  S. West,et al.  Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions. , 1994 .

[19]  J. Mathieu,et al.  Goal Orientation in Organizational Research: A Conceptual and Empirical Foundation , 1996 .

[20]  Murray R. Barrick,et al.  Relating member ability and personality to work-team processes and team effectiveness. , 1998 .

[21]  J. Hackman.  Group influences on individuals in organizations. , 1992 .

[22]  D. Mook,et al.  In defense of external invalidity. , 1983 .

[23]  K. R. Milner,et al.  A multiple-goal, multilevel model of feedback effects on the regulation of individual and team performance. , 2004, The Journal of applied psychology.

[24]  R. Golembiewski.  Handbook of Organizational Behavior , 2001 .

[25]  J. Hackman,et al.  The design of work teams , 1987 .

[26]  K. Sutcliffe,et al.  Management team learning orientation and business unit performance. , 2003, The Journal of applied psychology.

[27]  A. Bandura.  Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control , 1997, Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy.

[28]  P. Bliese.  Within-group agreement, non-independence, and reliability: Implications for data aggregation and analysis. , 2000 .

[29]  I. Steiner.  Group process and productivity , 1972 .

[30]  Eduardo Salas,et al.  Team Effectiveness and Decision Making in Organizations , 1995 .

[31]  L. James.  Aggregation Bias in Estimates of Perceptual Agreement. , 1982 .

[32]  Daniel R. Ilgen,et al.  TEAMS EMBEDDED IN ORGANIZATIONS : SOME IMPLICATIONS , 1999 .

[33]  M. D. Dunnette.  Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology , 2005 .

[34]  D. A. Kenny,et al.  The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. , 1986, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[35]  Daniel R. Ilgen,et al.  Effects of individual differences on the performance of hierarchical decision-making teams : Much more than g , 1997 .

[36]  Gail D. Heyman,et al.  Achievement goals and intrinsic motivation: Their relation and their role in adaptive motivation , 1992 .

[37]  D. Chan.  Functional Relations among Constructs in the Same Content Domain at Different Levels of Analysis: A Typology of Composition Models , 1998 .

[38]  E. A. Locke,et al.  Generalizing From Laboratory to Field Settings. , 1987 .

[39]  C. Burke,et al.  The impact of cross-training on team effectiveness. , 2002, The Journal of applied psychology.

[40]  S. Kozlowski,et al.  Goal orientation and ability: interactive effects on self-efficacy, performance, and knowledge. , 2002, The Journal of applied psychology.

[41]  John A. Wagner,et al.  Structural contingency theory and individual differences: examination of external and internal person-team fit. , 2002 .