2025哈佛大學過度設定目標設置的系統(tǒng)性副作用

GoalsGoneWild:TheSystematicSideEffectsofOver-PrescribingGoalSettingLisaD.Ordó?ezMauriceE.SchweitzerAdamD.GalinskyMaxH.Bazerman

LisaD.Ordó?ezMauriceE.SchweitzerAdamD.GalinskyMaxH.BazermanGoalsGone GoalsGoneWild:TheSystematicSideEffectsofOver-PrescribingGoalLisaD.EllerCollegeofManagement,UniversityofMauriceE.WhartonSchool,UniversityofAdamD.KelloggSchoolofManagement,NorthwesternMaxH.HarvardBusinessSchool,Harvard

LisaD.AdamD.MaxH.HarvardBusinessSchool,Harvard

GoalsGone GoalsGoneGoalsGoneGoalsettingisoneofthemostreplicatedandinfluentialparadigmsinthemanagementliterature.Hundredsofstudiesconductedinnumerouscountriesandcontextshaveconsistentlydemonstratedthatsettingspecific,challenginggoalscanpowerfullydrivebehaviorandboostperformance.Advocatesofgoalsettinghavehadasubstantialimpactonresearch,managementeducation,andmanagementpractice.Inthisarticle,wearguethatthebeneficialeffectsofgoalsettinghavebeenoverstatedandthatsystematicharmcausedbygoalsettinghasbeenlargelyignored.Weidentifyspecificsideeffectsassociatedwithgoalsetting,includinganarrowfocusthatneglectsnon-goalareas,ariseinunethicalbehavior,distortedriskpreferences,corrosionoforganizationalculture,andreducedintrinsicmotivation.Ratherthandispensinggoalsettingasabenign,over-the-countertreatmentformotivation,managersandscholarsneedtoconceptualizegoalsettingasaprescription-strengthmedicationthatrequirescarefuldosing,considerationofharmfulsideeffects,andclosesupervision.Weofferawarninglabeltoaccompanythepracticeofsettinggoals.

GoalsGoneWild:TheSystematicSideEffectsofOver-PrescribingGoalFordecades,goalsettinghasbeenpromotedasahalcyonpillforimprovingemployeemotivationandperformanceinorganizations.Acrosshundredsofexperiments,dozensoftasks,andthousandsofparticipantsacrossfourcontinents,theresultsareclear(Locke,Latham,Smith,&Wood,1990).Comparedtovague,easygoals(e.g.,“Doyourbest”),specific,challenginggoalsboostperformance.Inareviewoffourdecadesofgoal-settingresearch,LockeandLatham(2006)claim,“Solongasapersoniscommittedtothegoal,hastherequisiteabilitytoattainit,anddoesnothaveconflictinggoals,thereisapositive,linearrelationshipbetweengoaldifficultyandtaskperformance.”Inthisarticle,however,wecontendthatgoalsettinghasbeenover-prescribed.Inparticular,wearguethatgoalsettinghaspowerfulandpredictablesideeffects.Ratherthanbeingofferedasan“over-the-counter”salveforboostingperformance,goalsettingshouldbeprescribedselectively,presentedwithawarninglabel,andcloselymonitored.EmblematicExamplesofGoalsGoneHerearejustafewexamplesofthehazardsofindiscriminategoalsetting.First,considerSears,RoebuckandCo.’sexperiencewithgoalsettingintheearly1990s.Searssetsalesgoalsforitsautorepairstaffof$147/hour.Thisspecific,challenginggoalpromptedstafftooverchargeforworkandtocompleteunnecessaryrepairsonacompanywidebasis(Dishneau,1992).Ultimately,Sears’ChairmanEdwardBrennanacknowledgedthatgoalsettinghadmotivatedSears’employeestodeceivecustomers.Sears’“goalsettingprocessforserviceadviserscreatedanenvironmentwheremistakesdidoccur,”Brennanadmitted(Santoro&Paine,1993).

GoalsGoneWild:TheSystematicSideEffectsofOver-PrescribingGoal實驗、數(shù)十項任務和數(shù)千名參與者中，跨越四大洲，結果清晰（Locke,Latham,和Latham（2006）聲稱，“只要一個人對目標有承諾，具備實現(xiàn)目標的能力，并且然而，本文我們認為目標設定已被過度推薦。特別是，我們認為目標設定具有強大“”上警告標簽，并密切監(jiān)控。以下是一些任意設定目標危害的例子。首先，考慮一下西爾斯羅巴克公司（Sears,RoebuckandCo.）在20世紀90年代初的目標設定經(jīng)驗。西爾斯為其汽車維修人員設定了每小時147美元的銷售目標。這個具體、具有挑戰(zhàn)性的目標促使員工超收費用并完成不必要的維修，這在公司范圍內(nèi)普遍存在（Dishneau,1992）。最終，西爾斯董事長GoalsGone Inthelate1990s,specific,challenginggoalsfueledenergy-tradingcompanyEnron’srapidfinancialsuccess.Ackman(2002)comparesEnron’sincentivesystemto“payingasalesmanacommissionbasedonthevolumeofsalesandlettinghimsetthepriceofgoodssold.”EvenduringEnron’sfinaldays,Enronexecutiveswererewardedwithlargebonusesformeetingspecificrevenuegoals.Insum,“Enronexecutivesweremeetingtheirgoals,buttheywerethewronggoals,”accordingtoemployeecompensationexpertSolangeCharas.Byfocusingonrevenueratherthanprofit,Enronexecutivesdrovethecompanyintotheground.Inthelate1960s,theFordMotorCompanywaslosingmarketsharetoforeigncompetitorsthatweresellingsmall,fuel-efficientcars.CEOLeeIacoccaannouncedthespecific,challenginggoalofproducinganewcarthatwouldbe“under2000poundsandunder$2,000”andwouldbeavailableforpurchasein1970.Thisgoal,coupledwithatightdeadline,meantthatmanylevelsofmanagementsignedoffonunperformedsafetycheckstoexpeditethedevelopmentofthecar—theFordPinto.Oneomittedsafetycheckconcernedthefueltank,whichwaslocatedbehindtherealaxleinlessthan10inchesofcrushspace.LawsuitslaterrevealedwhatFordshouldhavecorrectedinitsdesignprocess:thePintocouldigniteuponimpact.InvestigationsrevealedthatafterFordfinallydiscoveredthehazard,executivesremainedcommittedtotheirgoalandinsteadofrepairingthefaultydesign,calculatedthatthecostsoflawsuitsassociatedwithPintofires(whichinvolved53deathsandmanyinjuries)wouldbelessthanthecostoffixingthedesign.Inthiscase,thespecific,challenginggoalsweremet(speedtomarket,fuelefficiency,andcost)attheexpenseofotherimportantfeaturesthatwerenotspecified(safety,ethicalbehavior,andcompanyreputation).Asthesedisasterssuggest,theharmfuleffectsofgoalsettinghavereceivedfartoolittleattentioninthemanagementliterature.Althoughpriorworkhasacknowledged“pitfalls”ofgoal

20世紀90年代末，具體而具有挑戰(zhàn)性的目標推動了能源交易公司安然迅速的財務成功。Ackman（2002）將安然的激勵機制比作給銷售人員按銷售額提成，并讓他設定銷售商品的價格。即使在安然最后的日子里，安然高管因達成特定的收入目標而獲得了大額獎金?？偟膩碚f安然高管們達到了他們的目標，但卻是錯誤的目標，”在20世紀60年代末，福特汽車公司正失去市場份額，被銷售小型、節(jié)油汽車的國·艾柯卡宣布了一個具體、具有挑戰(zhàn)性的目標：生產(chǎn)一200020001970加上緊迫的截止日期，意味著許多管理層簽署了未經(jīng)執(zhí)行的安全檢查，以加快汽車——福特Pinto的開發(fā)。其中一項被省略的安全檢查涉及油箱，該油箱位于后軸后方，僅有不到10英寸的擠壓空間。后來的訴訟揭示了福特在設計過程中應該糾正的問題：Pinto在標，而不是修復有缺陷的設計，而是計算與Pinto火災相關的訴訟成本（涉及53人死亡（上市速度、燃油效率和成本）是以犧牲其他未指定的重要特征為代價的（德行為和公司聲譽）工作已經(jīng)承認了陷阱”GoalsGone setting(Latham&Locke,2006),wearguethattheharmfulsideeffectsofgoalsettingarefarmoreseriousandsystematicthanpriorworkhasacknowledged.First,webeginbydescribingthesystematicandpredictablewaysinwhichgoalsettingharmsorganizations.Wedescribehowtheuseofgoalsettingcandegradeemployeeperformance,shiftfocusawayfromimportantbutnon-specifiedgoals,harminterpersonalrelationships,corrodeorganizationalculture,andmotivateriskyandunethicalbehaviors.Wearguethat,inmanysituations,thedamagingeffectsofgoalsettingoutweighitsbenefits.Second,weofferawarninglabeltoguidetheuseofgoalsetting.Weidentifyspecificquestionsmanagersshouldasktoascertainwhethertheharmfuleffectsofgoalsettingoutweighthepotentialbenefits.Third,wecallforfurtherstudyoftheadverseconsequencesofgoalsetting.Giventhewidespreadendorsementanduseofgoalsetting,wearguethattheharmfuleffectsofgoalsettingdeserveadditionalscholarlyandmanagerialattention.HowGoalsGoAdvocatesofgoalsettingarguethatforgoalstobesuccessful,theyshouldbespecificandchallenging.Countlessstudies(seeLocke&Latham,2002,2006)findthatspecific,challenginggoalsmotivateperformancefarbetterthan“doyourbest”exhortations.Accordingtothesefindings,specificgoalsprovideclear,unambiguous,andobjectivemeansforevaluatingemployeeperformance.Specificgoalsfocuspeople’sattention;lackingaspecificgoal,employeeattentionmaybedispersedacrosstoomanypossibleobjectives.Inturn,becausechallenginggoals,or“stretch”goals,createadiscrepancybetweenone’scurrentandexpectedoutput,theymotivategreatereffortandpersistence.

（Latham&Locke，2006年），我們認為目標設定的有害副作用比先前的工作所承認數(shù)的研究（參見Locke&Latham，2002年，2006年）發(fā)現(xiàn)，具體且具有挑戰(zhàn)性的目標比“盡力而為”的號召更能激勵績效。根據(jù)這些發(fā)現(xiàn)，具體的目標提供了明確、無目標或“拉伸”目標在當前產(chǎn)出和預期產(chǎn)出之間產(chǎn)生了差距，它們激勵了更大的努力GoalsGoneGoalsGoneAlthoughspecific,challenginggoalscanproducepositiveresults,wearguethatitisoftenthesesamecharacteristicsofgoalsthatcausethemto“gowild.”WhenGoalsAreTooAsresearchhasshown,goalsfocusattention.Unfortunately,goalscanfocusattentionsonarrowlythatpeopleoverlookotherimportantfeaturesofatask.ConsiderSimonsandChabris'(1999;Neisser,1979)well-knownstudyofinattentionalblindness.Theresearchersaskedparticipantstowatchavideoinwhichtwogroupsofplayerspassbasketballs.Onegroupwearswhiteshirts;theothergroupwearsdarkshirts.Giventhetaskofcountingbasketballpassesamongpeoplewearingonlywhiteshirts,peopleunconsciouslyblockouttheblackshirtedindividuals.Asaresultofthisnarrowfocus,mostparticipantsfailtonoticewhenamanwearingablackgorillasuitsauntersintothemiddleofthescreen,poundshischest,andwalksoffscreen.Intenseconcentrationonthecountingtaskcausespeopletooverlookastrikingelementoftheirvisualworld.Thisfocusingproblemhasbroadapplication(Bazerman&Chugh,2006)anddirectrelevancetogoalsetting.NarrowGoals.Withgoals,peoplenarrowtheirfocus.Thisintensefocuscanblindpeopletoimportantissuesthatappearunrelatedtotheirgoal(asinthecaseofFordemployeeswhooverlookedsafetytestingtorushthePintotomarket).Thetendencytofocustoonarrowlyongoalsiscompoundedwhenmanagerschartthewrongcoursebysettingthewronggoal(e.g.,settingrevenueratherthanprofitgoalsatEnron).Settingappropriategoalsisadifficult,intricateprocess.Supposethatauniversitydepartmentbasestenuredecisionsprimarilyonthenumberofarticlesthatprofessorspublish.Thisgoalwillmotivateprofessorstoaccomplishthenarrowobjectiveofpublishingarticles.Otherimportantobjectives,however,suchasresearchimpact,teaching,andservice,maysuffer.

特征導致了它們失控”。當目標過于具體 以至于人們忽略了任務的其他重要特征。考慮Simons和Chabris（1999；Neisser，1979）關于注意力缺失的著名研究。研究人員要求參與者觀看一段視頻，視頻中兩組球個問題有廣泛的應用（Bazerman&Chugh，2006）并且與目標設定有直接相關性。忽視與他們的目標看似無關的重要問題（例如，福特員工在匆忙推出Pinto車型時忽略Consistentwiththeclassicnotionthatyougetwhatyoureward(Kerr,1975,1995),goalsettingmaycausepeopletoignoreimportantdimensionsofperformancethatarenotspecifiedbythegoalsettingsystem.StawandBoettger(1990)documentthehazardsofnarrowfocusfosteredbygoalsinacleverstudy.Theyaskedstudentstoproofreadaparagraphthatcontainedbothgrammaticalandblatantcontenterrors.Theparagraphwaspurportedlygoingtobeusedinabrochurepromotingthebusinesscollege.Theauthorsfoundthatindividualsinstructedto“doyourbest”weremorelikelytocorrectbothgrammaticalandcontenterrorsthanwerethosewhoweregivenexplicitgoalstocorrecteithergrammarorcontent.Tenbrunsel,Wade-Benzoni,Messick,andBazerman(2000)makearelatedpoint.Theyarguethatstandards,suchastheEnvironmentalProtectionAgency’sstandardsonpollution,toooftenfocuscomplianceonspecific,measureablestandardsattheexpenseoftheoverallgoalofprotectingtheenvironment.Whenmanagersettargetsforspecificdimensionsofaproblem,theyoftenfailtoanticipatethebroaderresultsoftheirdirectives.Goals“informtheindividualaboutwhatbehaviorisvaluedandappropriate”(Staw&Boettger,1990).Theverypresenceofgoalsmayleademployeestofocusmyopicallyonshort-termgainsandtolosesightofthepotentialdevastatinglong-termeffectsontheorganization.Toomanygoals.Arelatedproblemoccurswhenemployeespursuemultiplegoalsatonetime.Shah,Friedman,andKruglanski(2002)demonstratethatindividualswithmultiplegoalsarepronetoconcentrateononlyonegoal.Relatedresearchsuggeststhatsometypesofgoalsaremorelikelytobeignoredthanothers.Inastockselectiontask,GillilandandLandis(1992)gaveparticipantsbothqualitygoalsandquantitygoals.Whenquantityandqualitygoalswerebothdifficult,participantssacrificedqualitytomeetthequantitygoals.Goalsthatareeasierto

與經(jīng)典觀念一致，即你得到你獎勵的（Kerr，1975，1995），目標設定可能導致人們StawBoettger（1990）通過一項巧妙的研究記錄了由目標引起的狹隘關注所造成的危害。他們要求學生校對一個既包含語法錯誤又包含明顯內(nèi)容錯誤的段落。該段“”MessickBazerman（2000）提出了一個相關觀點。他們認為，標準，如美國環(huán)保署的污染標準，往往過于關注具體、可衡量的標準，而犧牲了保護環(huán)境的整體目標。（Staw&Boettger，1990）。目標目標過多。當員工同時追求多個目標時，會出現(xiàn)相關的問題。ShahFriedmanKruglanski（2002）證明，具有多個目標的人傾向于只關注一個目標。相關研究表明，某些類型的目標更容易被忽視。在股票選擇任務中，GillilandLandis（1992）給參與者提供了質量和數(shù)量目標。當數(shù)量和質量的難度都很大時，參與者為了達到數(shù)量目標而犧牲了質量。那些更容易實現(xiàn)的目標achieveandmeasure(suchasquantity)maybegivenmoreattentionthanothergoals(suchasquality)inamulti-goalsituation.InappropriateTimeHorizon.Evenifgoalsaresetontherightattribute,thetimehorizonmaybeinappropriate.Forexample,goalsthatemphasizeimmediateperformance(e.g.,thisquarter’sprofits)promptmanagerstoengageinmyopic,short-termbehaviorthatharmstheorganizationinthelongrun.Cheng,Subramanyam,andZhang(2005)showedthatfirmsthatfrequentlyissuequarterlyearningsreports,comparedtofirmsthatreportearningslessfrequently,tendedtomeetorbeatanalystexpectations,butalsotendedtoinvestlessinresearchanddevelopment.Theefforttomeetshort-termtargetsoccurredattheexpenseoflong-termgrowth.Somecompaniesarelearningfromthesemistakes;CocaColaannouncedin2002thatiswouldceaseissuingquarterlyearningsguidanceandprovidemoreinformationaboutprogressonmeetinglong-termobjectives.Thetimehorizonproblemisrelatedtothenotionthatgoalscanleadpeopletoperceivetheirgoalsasceilingsratherthanfloorsforperformance.JustasthepigeonsintheSkinnerexperimentsdemonstrated“post-pelletpause”(astateofinactivityaftertheirpeckingproducedthedesiredpelletoffood),onceagoalisachievedpeoplerelax,rest,andpause.Forexample,asalesperson,aftermeetinghermonthlysalesquota,mayspendtherestofthemonthplayinggolfratherthanworkingonnewsalesleads.AnexcellentexampleofthisproblemcomesfromastudyofNewYorkCitycabdrivers.Thisstudyanswerstheage-oldquestionofwhyitissohardtogetacabonarainyday(Camerer,Babcock,Loewenstein,&Thaler,1997).Mostpeopleblamedemand:Whenitisraining,morepeoplehailcabsthanwhentheweatherisclear.Butasitturnsout,supplyisanotherimportantculprit.Asadayprogresses,cabsstartdisappearingmorequicklyfromManhattanstreetsonrainydaysthanonsunnydays.Why?Becauseofthe

些公司正在從這些錯誤中吸取教訓；可口可樂公司在2002年宣布將停止發(fā)布季度收益指不是底線。正如Skinner實驗中的鴿子表現(xiàn)出食丸后暫停（在啄食產(chǎn)生期望的食古老的疑問：為什么在雨天很難打到出租車（Camerer、Babcock、Loewenstein和Thaler，1997）。大多數(shù)人將需求歸咎于原因：下雨時，叫出租車的人比天氣晴朗GoalsGoneGoalsGonespecific,dailygoalsthatmostcabdriversset:agoaltoearndoubletheamountitcoststhemtorentouttheircabsfora12-hourshift.Onrainydays,cabbiesmakemoneymorequicklythanonsunnydays(becausedemandisindeedhigher),hittheirdailygoalsooner,andthentheygohome(theproblemofgoalsasceilings).Thisfindingfliesinthefaceoftheeconomictenetofwageelasticity,whichpredictsthatpeopleshouldworkmorehoursondayswhentheycanearnmoremoneyandlessondayswhentheyearnless.IfNYCtaxidriversusedalongertimehorizon(perhapsweeklyormonthly),kepttrackofindicatorsofincreaseddemand(e.g.,rainorspecialevents),andignoredtheirtypicaldailygoal,theycouldincreasetheiroverallwages,decreasetheoveralltimetheyspendworking,andimprovethewelfareofdrenchedNewYorkers.WhenGoalsAreTooProponentsofgoalsettingclaimthatapositivelinearrelationshipexistsbetweenthedifficultyofagoalandemployeeperformance.Specifically,theyarguethatgoalsshouldbesetatthemostchallenginglevelpossibletoinspireeffort,commitment,andperformance—butnotsochallengingthatemployeesseenopointintrying.Thislogicmakesintuitivesense,yetstretchgoalsalsocauseseriousside-effects:shiftingriskattitudes,promotingunethicalbehavior,andtriggeringthepsychologicalcostsofgoalfailure.Risktaking.Aspriorworkconjectured(Neale&Bazerman,1985;Knight,Durham,&Locke,2001)andrecentworkdemonstrates(Larrick,Heath,&Wu,inpress),goal-settingdistortsriskpreferences.Larricketal.(inpress)demonstratethatpeoplemotivatedbyspecific,challenginggoalsadoptriskierstrategiesandchooseriskiergamblesthandothosewithlesschallengingorvaguegoals.Relatedworkhasfoundthatgoalsharmnegotiationperformancebyincreasingriskybehavior.Negotiatorswithgoalsaremorelikelytoreachaninefficientimpassethanare

他們認為目標應該設定在最具挑戰(zhàn)性的水平，以激發(fā)努力、承諾和績效——但不要設定風險承擔。如先前的研究所推測（Neale&Bazerman，1985Knight，Durham，&Locke，2001）以及最近的研究所證明（Larrick，Heath，&Wu，待發(fā)表），目標設定扭曲了風險偏好。Larrick等人（待發(fā)表）證明，受具體、具有挑戰(zhàn)GoalsGoneGoalsGonenegotiatorswholackgoals(Neale&Bazerman,1985;Galinsky,Mussweiler,&Medvec,2002).Forexample,Galinskyetal.(2002)foundthatstretchgoalsincreasedthenumberofimpasses,andLarricketal.(inpress)foundthatgoalspromptedparticipantstomakelargerdemandsthatinturndestroyedvalue.Itisalsoquiteeasytoimaginethatinaverydifferentcontext,anegotiatorwhohasobtainedconcessionssufficienttoreachtheirgoal,willsatisficeandaccepttheagreementonthetable,evenifthevaluemaximizingstrategywouldbetocontinuethenegotiationprocess.Clearly,insomedomains,goalsettingcansignificantlyharmperformanceratherthanpromotingbetteroutcomes.Anexcessivefocusongoalsmayhavepromptedtherisk-takingbehaviorthatliesattherootofmanyreal-worlddisasters.ThecollapseofContinentalIllinoisBankprovidesanexamplewithstrikingparallelstothecollapseofEnronandthefinancialcrisisof2008.In1976,Continental’schairmanannouncedthatwithinfiveyears,themagnitudeofthebank’slendingwouldmatchthatofanyotherbank.Toreachthisstretchgoal,thebankshifteditsstrategyfromconservativecorporatefinancingtowardaggressivepursuitofborrowers.Continentalallowedofficerstobuyloansmadebysmallerbanksthathadinvestedheavilyinveryriskyloans.Continentalwouldhavebecometheseventh-largestU.S.bankifitsborrowershadbeenabletorepaytheirloans;instead,followingmassiveloandefaults,thegovernmenthadtobailoutthe

缺乏目標談判者（Neale&Bazerman，1985；Galinsky，Mussweiler和Medvec，2002）。例如，Galinsky等人（2002）發(fā)現(xiàn)，挑戰(zhàn)性目標增加了僵局的次數(shù)，Larrick等人（待發(fā)表）發(fā)現(xiàn)，目標促使參與者提出更大的要求，而這些要求反過來又

Inotherdomains,suchasthedesignprocessfortheFordPinto,theperceptualblinders

在其他領域，如福特Pintonarrowandchallenginggoalshavehadfatalconsequences.Kayes(2006)citesthe1996Mt.Everestdisasterinwhicheightclimbersdiedduetothedecisionsofthetwoteamleadersasanexampleof“destructivegoalpursuit.”O(jiān)nMt.Everest,world-classhigh-altitudeguides,RobHallandScottFischer,identifiedsocloselywiththegoalofreachingthesummitthattheymade

產(chǎn)生了致命的后果。Kayes（2006）引用了1996年珠穆朗瑪峰災難作為“破壞性目標追求”的例子。在珠穆朗瑪峰上，世界級的高海?向導RobHall和ScottFischerGoalsGoneGoalsGoneriskydecisionsthatledtotheirownand6oftheirclients’deaths.Kayesidentifieswarningsignsofleaderswhohavebecomeexcessivelyfixatedongoals.Theseoccurinleaderswhoexpressnarrowlydefinedgoals,associategoalswithdestiny,expressanidealizedfuture,offergoal-drivenjustifications,facepublicexpectations,andattempttoengageinface-savingbehavior.Unethicalbehavior.Anotherseriouswayinwhichgoalsettingcandamageorganizationsisbypromotingunethicalbehavior.AtSears’automotiveunit,employeeschargedcustomersforunnecessaryrepairsinordertomeetspecific,challenginggoals.Inthelate1980s,Miniscribeemployeesshippedbrickstocustomersinsteadofdiskdrivestomeetshippingtargets.Andin1993,BauschandLombemployeesfalsifiedfinancialstatementstomeetearningsgoals.Ineachofthesecases,specific,challenginggoalsmotivatedemployeestoengageinunethicalbehavior.Goalsettinghasbeenpromotedasapowerfulmotivationaltool,butsubstantialevidencedemonstratesthatinadditiontomotivatingconstructiveeffort,goalsettingcaninduceunethicalbehavior.Surprisinglylittleresearchinthegoal-settingliteraturehasexaminedwhatpeoplemightdowhentheyhavetheopportunitytomisrepresenttheirperformanceorcheattoattainagoal.Oneofthefewstudiesthatlookedforadirectlinkbetweengoalsettingandcheatingfoundthatparticipantsweremorelikelytomisrepresenttheirperformancelevelwhentheyhadaspecific,challenginggoalthanwhentheydidnot,especiallywhentheiractualperformancelevelfelljustshortofreachingthegoal(Schweitzer,Ordó?ez,&Douma,2004).Goalsettingcanpromotetwodifferenttypesofcheatingbehavior.First,whenmotivatedbyagoal,peoplemaychoosetouseunethicalmethodstoreachit.Forexample,atSears,mechanicstoldcustomersthattheyneededunnecessaryrepairsandthenperformedandchargedthemforthisunneededwork.Second,goalsettingcanmotivatepeopletomisrepresenttheirperformancelevel—inotherwords,toreportthattheymetagoalwheninfacttheyfellshort.For

6（Kayes）確定了那些對目標過度著在希爾斯（Sears）的汽車部門，員工為了達到特定的、具有挑戰(zhàn)性的目標，向客戶收取不必要的維修費用。在20世紀80年代末，Miniscribe的員工為了達到運輸目標，向客戶發(fā)送磚塊而不是磁盤驅動?。1993年，寶視來（BauschandLomb）的員工為們的實際表現(xiàn)水平剛剛達不到目標時（Schweitzer，Ordó?ez，&Douma2004） 曲他們的表現(xiàn)水平——換句話說，報告他們達到了目標，而實際上他們沒有達到。GoalsGoneGoalsGoneexample,employeesatBauschandLombwhoweredriventoreachsalestargetsreportedsalesthatnevertookplace.Similarly,whenseniormanagementgiveslawyersandconsultantsspecific,challenginggoalsforbillablehours,theymaybillclientsforhourstheyneverworked.Goalsetting,ofcourse,isnottheonlycauseofemployeeunethicalbehavior,butitiscertainlyanimportant,understudiedingredient.Anumberoffactorsserveascatalystsintherelationshipbetweengoalsettingandcheating:laxoversight,financialincentivesformeetingperformancetargets(Jensen,2003;Schweitzeretal.,2004),andorganizationalcultureswithaweakcommitmenttoethics.Theinterplaybetweenorganizationalcultureandgoalsettingisparticularlyimportant.Anethicalorganizationalculturecanreignintheharmfuleffectsofgoalsetting,butatthesametime,theuseofgoalscaninfluenceorganizationalculture.Specifically,theuseofgoalsetting,like“managementbyobjectives,”createsafocusonendsratherthanmeans.Barsky(2007)arguesthatgoalsettingimpedesethicaldecisionmakingbymakingitharderforemployeestorecognizeethicalissuesandeasierforthemtorationalizeunethicalbehavior.Giventhatsmallactionswithinanorganizationcanhavebroadimplicationsfororganizationalculture(Fleming&Zyglidopoulos,2008),wepostulatethataggressivegoalsettingwithinanorganizationwillfosteranorganizationalclimateripeforunethicalbehavior.Thatis,notonlydoesgoalsettingdirectlymotivateunethicalbehavior,butitsintroductionmayalsomotivateunethicalbehaviorindirectlybysubtlyalteringanorganization’sculture.Insum,althoughmanyfactorscontributetounethicalbehavior,thepointcannotbeoverstated:goalsettingmotivatesunethicalbehavior.Dissatisfactionandthepsychologicalconsequencesofgoalfailure.Oneproblemembeddedinstretchgoalsisthepossibilitythatthegoalmaynotbereached.Innegotiations,forexample,challenginggoalscanincreasenegotiationandtaskperformance,butdecrease

績效目標的財務激勵（Jensen，2003；Schweitzer等人，2004），以及缺乏對道目標管理一樣，導致了對結果而不是手段的關注。Barsky（2007）阻礙了道德決策。鑒于組織內(nèi)部的小行動可能對組織文化產(chǎn)生廣泛的影響（Fleming&Zyglidopoulos，2008），我們提出，組織內(nèi)部的激進目標設定將培養(yǎng)一個孕育不道德GoalsGoneGoalsGonesatisfactionwithhigh-qualityoutcomes(Galinskyetal.,2002;Garland,1983).Thesedecreasesinsatisfactioninfluencehowpeopleviewthemselvesandhaveimportantconsequencesforfuturebehavior.MussweilerandStrack(2000)foundthatgivingsomeoneachallenginggoalversusaneasygoalonanattentiontaskoranintelligencetestimprovedperformance,butleftpeoplequestioningtheirconcentrationabilitiesandoverallintelligence.Thesegoal-inducedreductionsinself-efficacycanbehighlydetrimental,becauseperceptionsofself-efficacyareakeypredictoroftaskengagement,commitment,andeffort(Bandura,1977).Goals,Learning,andInordertoadapttoacompetitivelandscape,organizationsneedemployeeswhoareabletolearnandcollaboratewiththeircolleagues.Goalscaninhibitbothlearningandcooperation.Goalsinhibitlearning.Whenindividualsfaceacomplextask,specific,challenginggoalsmayinhibitlearningfromexperienceanddegradeperformancecomparedtoexhortationsto“doyourbest”(Cervone,Jiwani,&R.Wood,1991;Earley,Connolly,&Ekegren,1989;RobertWood,Bandura,&Bailey,1990).Anindividualwhoisnarrowlyfocusedonaperformancegoal,willbelesslikelytotryalternativemethodsthatcouldhelpherlearnhowtoperformatask.Asanexampleofthisphenomenon,LockeandLatham(2002)describeanairtrafficcontrollersimulationinwhichtheperformancegoalinterferedwithlearninginthiscomplexdomain(Kanfer&Ackerman,1989).Overall,thenarrowfocusofspecificgoalscaninspireperformancebutpreventlearning.LockeandLathamrecommendthat“l(fā)earninggoals”shouldbeusedincomplexsituationsratherthan“performancegoals.”Inpractice,however,managersmayhavetroubledeterminingwhenataskiscomplexenoughtowarrantalearning,ratherthanaperformancegoal.Inmanychangingbusinessenvironments,perhapslearninggoalsshouldbethenorm.Even

對高質量成果的滿意度（Galinsky等，2002；Garland，1983）。這些滿意度的降低會影響人們對自我的看法，并對未來的行為產(chǎn)生重要影響。Mussweiler和Strack（2000）發(fā)現(xiàn)，在注意力任務或智力測試中，給予某人具有挑戰(zhàn)性的目標而不是容易測因素（Bandura，1977）。目標、學習和合作1991；Earley，Connolly，&Ekegren，1989；RobertWood，Bandura，&Bailey，1990）。一個專注于績效目標的個人，將不太可能嘗試可能幫助她學習如何完成任務的其他方法。例如，Locke和Latham（2002）描述了一個空中交通管制員模擬，在這個復雜領域，績效目標干擾了學習（Kanfer&Ackerman，1989）?？偟膩?Locke和Latham建議，在復雜情況下應使用“學習目標”，而不是“績效目標”。GoalsGoneGoalsGonewhentasksarecomplexenoughtoclearlywarrantlearninggoals,managersfacethechallengeofidentifyingthespecific,challenginggoallevelsforlearningobjectives.Thegoalofsettingtherightgoalsisitselfachallengingaffair.Goalscreateacultureofcompetition.Organizationsthatrelyheavilyongoalsettingmayerodethefoundationofcooperationthatholdsgroupstogether.Arrow(1973)arguedthatanexclusivefocusonprofitmaximizationcanharmaltruisticandother-regardingbehavioralmotives.Similarly,beingtoofocusedonachievingaspecificgoalmaydecreaseextra-rolebehavior,suchashelpingcoworkers(Wright,George,Farnsworth,&McMahan,1993).Goalsmaypromotecompetitionratherthancooperationandultimatelyloweroverallperformance(Mitchell&Silver,1990).WhenGoalsHarmMotivationAsgoalsettingincreasesextrinsicmotivation,itcanharmintrinsicmotivation–engaginginataskforitsownsake(Mossholder,1980;Rawsthorne&Elliot,1999;Shalley&Oldham,1985).Thisistrueofrewardsingeneral(