The influence of planning, support and self-concordance on goal progress and job satisfaction

Published date07 December 2015
Date07 December 2015
Pages206-221
DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1108/EBHRM-04-2014-0013
AuthorDirk van Dierendonck
Subject MatterHR & organizational behaviour,Global HRM
The influence of planning,
support and self-concordance on
goal progress and job satisfaction
Dirk van Dierendonck
Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University,
Rotterdam, The Netherlands
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to test the combined influence of working towards
self-concordantgoals with goal planning and supervisory support on goalprogress and job satisfaction.
Design/methodology/approach The data were collected among prison guards. The analysis takes into
account a multilevel perspective on goals by differentiating between within- and between-person variance.
Findings The results showed that there was no direct effect of self-concordance on goal
progress. Goal progress depended on combining self-concordant goals with conscious planning
and receiving supervisory support. Furthermore, it was found that job satisfaction and goal progress
influenced each other over time.
Research limitations/implications The findings confirm that to understand the influence of
self-concordant goals within organizations, planning and supervisory support are essential elements
for achieving goal progress. This research is the first to confirm the interrelatedness of goal progress
and job-satisfaction over time.
Originality/value The multilevel intra and interpersonal approach provides a more thorough
insight into the processes involved with goal striving. It emphasizes the importance of differentiation
between the different levels of motivation in Deci and Ryans self-determination theory, especially
when applied within the work context.
Keywords Work engagement and commitment, Employee motivation
Paper type Research paper
1. Introduction
For several years, the importance of employee motivation for continued performance
and innovation has been increasingly emphasized (Locke and Latham, 2004). The
primacy of goals for motivation, continued effort and success has been shown
extensively. A point of discussion within the literature is the extent to which goals
need to be intrinsic for continued success. In particular, Deci and Ryans (2000)
self-determinat ion theory has put fo rward the essentia l role of striving for
autonomously formulated goals. Sheldon and Elliots (1999) self-concordance
construct, which is grounded in self-determination theory, has arguably been
instrumental in stimulating goal-directed research on the impact of intrinsic vs
extrinsic motivation on goal progress and well-being. The approach and
operationalization of self-concordance is explicitly goal oriented. Self-concordance
indicates the extent to which a persons goals are pursued because of core values and
enduring interests, reflecting a core self. A strong sense of self-concordance means that
goals are integrated within the self, there is a feeling of ownership of those goals
and one experiences an internal locus of causality resulting in proactive behaviour
(Bono and Judge, 2003).
Previous studies, utilizing mostly student samples, have provided confirmation of
the importance of self-concordance for goal progress and well-being (for a review, see
Evidence-based HRM: a Global
Forum for Empirical Scholarship
Vol. 3 No. 3, 2015
pp. 206-221
©Emerald Group Publishing Limited
2049-3983
DOI 10.1108/EBHRM-04-2014-0013
Received 11 April 2014
Revised 22 September 2014
Accepted 12 November 2014
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/2049-3983.htm
206
EBHRM
3,3
Gaudreau et al., 2012). However, within the organizational context, with its hierarchical
social structure and where most people cannot simply quit because they need their
earnings to pay their mortgage (among other things), extrinsically motivated work gets
done anyhow. Thus, it should come as no surprise that studies with work samples
failed to confirm the direct influence of self-concordance on performance (Bono and
Judge, 2003) or goal progress ( Judge et al., 2005) found in student samples.
It is likely that the organizational context interferes with the direct influence of
self-concordance. Within organizations, a broader model is therefore essential to
enhance our understanding of the role of self-concordant motivation in relation to goal
progress and well-being.
This paper sets out to test an integrative model that extends self-determination
theory with insights gained from Gollwitzers (1996) implementation intentions
research and Fredericksons (1998) broaden-and-build theory, herewith building on
earlier research by Koestner et al. (2002, 2006, 2008). The model (see Figure 1) guiding
our research describes a process that combines the influence of self-concordance
with that of goal planning and supervisory support on goal progress and job
satisfaction; it takes a multilevel perspective by incorporating both the within- and the
between-person perspectives.
2. Theory and hypotheses deve lopment
2.1 Self-concordance and goal progress
Self-determination theory (Deci and Ryan, 2000) proposes that within individuals, an
internalization process is at work that converts social norms and requests into
personally approved values. They propose that five different forms of self-regulation
which exemplify the extent to which behaviour is self-determined can be distinguished:
(1) External regulation means that behaviour is fully externally determined, for
example, to avoid punishment or to gain rewards.
(2) Introjection entails that outside influences are partly internalized without
becoming part of the self, for example, to avoid feelings of guilt or shame.
(3) Identification refers to a personal recognition of the values that underlie
behaviour. There is a fuller internalization although the behaviour itself may
not be enjoyable in and of itself for example, exercising or doing chores.
Job Satisfaction, T1
Self-Concordance, T1
Planning, T1
Social Support, T1
Goal Progress, T2
Job Satisfaction, T2
Figure 1.
Self-concordance
planning
support model
207
Support and
self-concordance
on goal
progress

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT