Page 228 - Psychological Management of Individual Performance

212 the high performance cycle: standing the test of time
TABLE 10.1 (continued)
Author(s) and
publication date Type of paper Major findings

Farh et al. Laboratory Satisfaction was highest when individuals were allowed
(1991) to choose their extrinsic rewards. High ability people
chose piece rate; low ability people chose a fixed rate.
Lee et al. Laboratory Goal–performance relationship was influenced by
(1997) external rewards only when people perceive the rewards
to be attainable.
Doherty Field High dissatisfaction was related to rewards that are
(1998) perceived as unfair, impersonal or as punishment.
Summers and Field Positive relationship found between pay fairness and
Hendrix (1991) pay satisfaction.
SATISFACTION LEADS TO ORGANIZATIONAL COMMITMENT
Tett and Meta-analysis Job satisfaction and organizational commitment are
Meyer (1993) distinct concepts.
Cohen and Meta-analysis Satisfaction-commitment relationship higher in private
Lowenberg than in the public sector, and for professional than for
(1990) clerical workers.
Alnajjar Field No correlation found between job satisfaction and
(1996) organizational commitment among people in the United
Emirates.
O’Driscoll and Field Satisfaction with intrinsic and extrinsic rewards was a
Randall (1999) significant predictor of affective organizational
commitment.

performance than self-set goals, because the latter were not as difficult. Self-set goals
have often been found to be less challenging than goals that are assigned to participants
in the normal population (Hinsz, 1991, 1995).
Similarly, Von Bergen, Soper, and Rosenthal (1996) found a positive relationship
between goal difficulty and performance. They also found that people with low self-
esteem performed worse when the assigned goal was moderately difficult while those
high in self-esteem performed best. Tang and Reynolds (1993) obtained the same finding.
Those with low self-esteem had lower self-set goals and lower performance than those
with high self-esteem. Self-esteem may have been a proxy variable for self-efficacy.
The finding that high goals lead to high performance is also true for groups. A meta-
analysis revealed that the mean performance level of groups with specific high goals
is almost one standard deviation higher than the performance of groups for which no
goals are set (O’Leary-Kelly, Martocchio, & Frink, 1994). Klein and Mulvey (1995)
and Mulvey and Klein (1998) showed that the difficulty level of a self-set group goal
correlates positively with the group’s performance. Crown and Rosse (1995) found that
group goals for individual members who were committed to the group increased the
group’s performance on an interdependent task relative to any other condition.
In summary, the finding that specific, difficult goals lead to the highest level of perfor-
mance for both individuals and groups continues to hold true when the proper method-
ology is used to detect the relationship. Only two studies have found non-significant