[TAG] Set Smart Goals: Stages of Learning and Goals Setting Theory

A new start-up can be tempted to set high performance goals such as a targeted monthly revenue. However, these goals could prove to be disastrous if set before the employees have fully learned the scope of their duties and how to work together as a team.


Note: This post is part of my TAG series - Tangential, Associative Germane. As part of my TAG series I hope to use short sound bites to reinforce the concepts of previous posts. The post this TAG refers to is Set Smart Goals: Stages of Learning and Goal Setting Theory.

Set Smart Goals: Stages of Learning & Goal Setting Theory

This post is one of many follow ups on the Learning Goals vs. Performance Goals post.  It was a bit dense so let us unpack it. I find Goal setting theory to be one of the more practically useful topics in psychology so I plan to spend some time on it. The first thing to understand is that different goal strategies are necessary for different stages of learning.

Stages of Learning

Kanfer and Ackerman broke skill acquisition into three stages: declarative knowledge, knowledge compilation, and procedural knowledge.[1] These stages are ordered from novice to mastery of the cognitive task.[2] The order also follows the cognitive resources required in performing the activity, with declarative knowledge requiring substantial attention, while procedural knowledge requires only minimal attention.[3]

In summation, during the declarative stages of learning, before performance routines become automatic, you require substantial cognitive resources to learn and master the task. Those in the procedural stage have automatized their performance. They can devout their cognitive resources to a second task with minimal impact on performance. 

Nexus to Learning vs. Performance Goals

What do the stages of learning have to do with learning & performance goals? As summarized by Seijts and Lath,

When people are in the declarative stage of learning, before performance routines have become automatic, their cognitive resources need to be allocated to mastering the processes required to perform well rather than to the attainment of a specific level of performance.[4]

 

Therefore, when you are in the declarative stage of learning - set learning goals. However, when you are in the procedural stage of learning - set performance goals.

---

[1] Ruth Kanfer and Phillip Ackerman, Motivation and Cognitive Abilities: An Integrative/Aptitude – Treatment Interaction Approach to Skill Acquisition, Journal of Applied Psychology Monograph (1984), 660-61.

[2] Id.

[3] Id.

[4] Gerad Seijts, Gary Latham, et al., Goal Setting and Goal Orientation: An Integration of Two Different Yet Related Literatures, The Academy of Management Journal, 229

Music Mondays - Le Super Borgou De Parakou - Congolaise Benin Ye

Learning Goals vs. Performance Goals

Goal Setting Theory has distinguished two distinct types of goals – Learning Goals (task-involved) vs. Performance Goals (ego-involved)[1].  

Performance Goals

Performance goals encompass a desire to impress others.[2] Performance goals reflect questions like “Will I look smart” or “Can I outperform others?”[3]  When a task requires learning, children who have a performance goal orientation focus on the end result and have an apprehension of failure.[4] Their focus on the consequences of failure can decrease motivation to complete the task altogether.[5]

 

Learning Goals

In contrast, learning goals encompass a desire to improve one’s competencies.[6] Learning goals reflect questions like “How can I do this task?” or “What will I learn?"[7] Initial poor performance is seen as a natural and instructive part of the process.[8] Learning goals increase self-efficacy and in turn likelihood of achieving the set goal.[9]

 

Setting Learning Goals is Generally Better

In general a specific high learning goal leads to higher performances on novel or complex tasks than a specific high performance goal.[10] For instance, MBA students who set specific learning goals (such as “learn to network, master specific course subject matter”), subsequently had higher GPAs than those who set performance Goals (such as achieve a high GPA, etc).[11]

This is because learning goals facilitates metacognition – the planning, monitoring, and evaluating progress toward goal attainment.[12] Novel or complex tasks require cognitive resources to learn what is required in order to perform well.[13] With learning goals one’s limited cognitive resources are focused on the mastering process as opposed to being focused on the attainment of a specific level of performance. [14]

So in conclusion – When a task requires learning, a specific high learning goal should be set. 

But Not Always

However, whenever you already possess the requisite knowledge and skill to perform a task then a specific high performance goal should be set.[15] At such stage you need not waste your cognitive resources discovering new strategies. Instead you should focus your attention on achieving a desired performance outcome.

Like this post? For more see my more recent post, Stages of Learning & Goal Setting Theory.

---

[1] Jacquelynne S. Eccles and Allan Wigfield, Motivational Beliefs, Values, and Goals, Institute for Social Research, 115.

[2] Id.

[3] Id.

[4] Gerad Seijts, Gary Latham, et al., Goal Setting and Goal Orientation: An Integration of Two Different Yet Related Literatures, The Academy of Management Journal, 228.

[5] Id.

[6] Id.

[7] See Eccles, supra note 1.

[8] See Seijts, supra note 4.

[9] Id.

[10] Id. at 229.

[11] Edwin A. Locke, and Gary Latham, New Directions in Goal-Setting Theory, Association for Psychology Science, 266.

[12] Id.

[13] See Seijts, supra note 4, at 229.

[14] Id.

[15] Id.

[TAG] Goals Are Contagious

People associate goals with other people, and the activation of a representation of such an important other can lead to automatic activation of these associated goals. This way, both goals that you often perform in the presence of an important other (e.g., you often help a particular friend) and goals that others have for you (e.g., your mother wants you to achieve) can be activated. Fitzsimons and Bargh demonstrated that merely thinking about an important other leads to the activation of goals…[1]

Note: This post is part of my TAG series - Tangential, Associative Germane. As part of my TAG series I hope to use short sound bites to reinforce the concepts of previous posts. The post this TAG refers to is Goals Are Contagious.

---

[1] Ap Dijksterhuis & Pamela Smith,  et al., The Unconscious Consumer: Effects ofEnvironment on Consumer Behavior, 2005, 198.

Goals Are Contagious

Perception-Behavior Link

In my previous post we learned about Perception-Behavior Link . This tells us that when we observe the behavior of another, we activate the same neurons in our brains that are active when we ourselves are performing that action.[1]

 

High & Low Roads to Imitation

Perception-behavior link is further divided into two distinctions – Low Road to imitation, and the High Road to imitation[2]. The previous post focused on the low-road to imitation – mimicry of observable behavior such as facial structure and posture. 

Automatic Goal Pursuit & Trait Inferences

Today’s post expands on our understanding of perception-link behavior by introducing the “high road to imitation”. We are not only wired to automatically copy observable behavior. We are also wired to automatically copy behavior that goes beyond information presented to us like traits, stereotypes, and goals.[3] In other words, by observing someone we automatically make inferences on their goals and then engage in mimicry of these inferred goals.

The takeaway from the High Road to Imitation is two-fold.  

Social Perceivers Often Infer Beyond the Information Given[4]

These inferences are based off of a handful of leading heuristics. An example would be inferring high career goals based on a person’s perceived social class.

Goals and Traits are Highly Contagious

We alter our behavior to correspond with our inferences of a person’s traits, stereotypes, and goals. Therefore, even if we do not actually witness the behavior, we nevertheless engage in automatic goal pursuit by inference.[5] The implications are numerous. For instance, seeing a well-dressed business-person could motivate you to aim harder at a work promotion. This goal contagion occurs irrespective of whether the observed person does in fact have the goals or traits of a competent businessman. Merely by inferring based on social and environmental cues, you could be motivated to copy your interaction partner’s goals or traits.

---

[1] Ap Dijksterhuis & Pamela Smith,  et al., The Unconscious Consumer: Effects ofEnvironment on Consumer Behavior, 2005, 195.

[2] Id.

[3] Id. at 196.

[4] Id.

[5] Id.

[TAG] Winning Friends - Imitation is The Greatest Form of Flattery

    Recently, van Baaren and colleagues demonstrated a spectacular advantage of the strategic use of imitation. Inspired by the results of Chartrand and Bargh (1999), they conducted a field experiment in a restaurant. They first established the average tip that waitresses received during a normal evening. They then instructed waitresses to imitate the verbal behavior of customers. That is, they were instructed to literally repeat the order of each customer. In the no-mimicry condition, they were instructed to avoid literal imitation, but paraphrase instead. In two separate studies, it was shown that exact verbal mimicry significantly increased the tips, whereas avoidance of mimicry reduced tips compared to baseline.[1]

Note: This post is part of my TAG series - Tangential, Associative Germane. As part of my TAG series I hope to use short sound bites to reinforce the concepts of previous posts. The post this TAG refers to is Winning Friends - Imitation is the Greatest Form of Flattery.

---

[1] Ap Dijksterhuis & Pamela Smith,  et al., The Unconscious Consumer: Effects ofEnvironment on Consumer Behavior, 2005, 196.