The authors summarize 35 years of empirical research on goal-setting theory. They describe the core findings of the theory, the mechanisms by which goals operate, moderators of goal effects, the relation of goals and satisfaction, and the role of goals as mediators of incentives. The external validity and practical significance of goal-setting theory are explained, and new directions in goal-setting research are discussed. The relationships of goal setting to other theories are described as are the theory’s limitations.

SUMMARY—Teams of people working together for a common purpose have been a centerpiece of human social organization ever since our ancient ancestors first banded together to hunt game, raise families, and defend their communities. Human history is largely a story of people working together in groups to explore, achieve, and conquer. Yet, the modern concept of work in large organizations that developed in the late 19th and early 20th centuries is largely a tale of work as a collection of individual jobs. A variety of global forces unfolding over the last two decades, however, has pushed organizations worldwide to restructure work around teams, to enable more rapid, flexible, and adaptive responses to the unexpected. This shift in the structure of work has made team effectiveness a salient organizational concern. Teams touch our lives everyday and their effectiveness is important to well-being across a wide range of societal functions. There is over 50 years of psychological research—literally thousands of studies—focused on understanding and influencing the processes that underlie team effectiveness. Our goal in this monograph is to sift through this voluminous literature to identify what we know, what we think we know, and what we need to know to improve the effectiveness of work groups and teams. We begin by defining team effectiveness and establishing the conceptual underpinnings of our approach to understanding it. We then turn to our review, which concentrates primarily on topics that have well-developed theoretical and empirical foundations, to ensure that our conclusions and recommendations are on firm footing. Our review begins by focusing on cognitive, motivational/affective, and behavioral team processes—processes that enable team members to combine their resources to resolve task demands and, in so doing, be effective. We then turn our attention to identifying interventions, or ‘‘levers,’ ’ that can shape or align team processes and thereby provide tools

On behalf of:

Speed-to-Market is cited as being vital in today’s competitive, uncertain and turbulent environments. Scholars and industry professionals alike assert that companies can achieve competitive advantages by launching their product faster than their competitors. However, this paper presents a slightly different perspective on speed-to-market by considering another aspect of the speed equation-speed-to-learn or fast learning in new product development (NPD) teams. We assert that although speed-to-market can increase the probability of new product success, speed-to-learn is one of the critical factors that allows teams to get to market rapidly and be more successful. In this study, we propose a model for fast team learning in new product development based on constructs borrowed from accelerated learning models or suggestopedy in the individual learning scholarship. We then empirically test the model on 171 new product teams. We argue that 1) fastlearning teams launch new products quicker with an increased probability of success. And 2) specific mechanisms that are within the teams ’ control can help teams learn faster. Mechanisms uncovered include: vision clarity, learning from customer and competitor, and information coding.

A challenge for many online production communities is to direct their members to accomplish tasks that are important to the group, even when these tasks may not match individual members ’ interests. Here we investigate how combining group identification and direction setting can motivate volunteers in online communities to accomplish tasks important to the success of the group as a whole. We hypothesize that group identity, the perception of belonging to a group, triggers in-group favoritism; and direction setting (including explicit direction from group goals and implicit direction from role models) focuses people’s group-oriented motivation towards the group’s important tasks. We tested our hypotheses in the context of Wikipedia's Collaborations of the Week (COTW), a group goal setting mechanism and a social event within Wikiprojects. Results demonstrate that 1) publicizing important group goals via COTW can have a strong motivating influence on editors who have voluntarily identified themselves as group members compared to those who have not self-identified; 2) the effects of goals spill over to non-goal related tasks; and 3) editors exposed to group role models in COTW are more likely to perform similarly to the models on group-relevant citizenship behaviors. Finally, we discuss design and managerial implications based on our findings.

This paper challenges the normative conception of the relationships of team goals and hidden agendas to team performance. In a 23-month participant observation study of a successful multi-organizational virtual team, I found that the members ’ actions were consistently motivated by local considerations. Based on these findings, I argue that team goal commitment may be an inappropriate goal for many virtual teams and offer an alternative model for the relationship between a virtual team goal and team performance.

This study contrasts the structural perspective with the individual perspective in explaining group performance in a dynamic setting. The authors argue that these perspectives are not mutually exclusive but have different predictive powers at different group stages. Results from 45 project groups show (a) group structures provide stronger performance predictions at the later stage, whereas individual-based attributes do so at the earlier stage, and (b) different group structures and individual-based attributes provide distinctive insights at respective stages. This indicates the need to explore the potential bridge between the two perspectives in advancing group studies.

This paper presents two studies investigating the influence of social perceptions (perceived loafing, collective efficacy, and cohesion) on group goal processes (difficulty and commitment) and group performance. The role of group goal processes as mediators of the relationships between social perception variables and group performance was also tested. The first study involved a sample of 247 college students in 59 groups working on a team interdependent, divisible academic task. Results supported all but one hypothesis. The mediation hypothesis was not supported as both group goal and social perception variables related similarly to group performance. The second study employed a different design to address some limitations of the first study and to extend those findings. Results from the second study, using 383 college students in 101 groups, were consistent with Study 1 with two exceptions. First, the mediation hypothesis was supported in Study 2, replicating the findings of Klein and Mulvey (1995). Second, anticipated lower effort and the sucker effect, additional intervening variables examined in Study 2, partially mediated The authors thank Charles Sterling for his help throughout Study 1; Claire McCarty for her assistance in collecting the data in Study 1; K. Shannon Davis and William J. Burpitt for their assistance in collecting the data in Study 2; Amanda Beecham and Matthew R. Smith for data

This paper challenges the normative conception of the relationships of team goals and hidden agendas to team performance. In a 23-month participant observation study of a successful multi-organizational virtual team, I found that the members ’ actions were consistently motivated by local considerations. Based on these findings, I argue that team goal commitment may be an inappropriate goal for many virtual teams and offer an alternative model for the relationship between a virtual team goal and team performance.

electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system,