Connecting Goals to Mission to Increase Productivity and Motivation
When it comes to being productive and motivated at work, there are many factors to consider. One of the most significant factors that drives our desire to work is why we choose to be productive, and why we are motivated to succeed. It’s no secret that having goals and benchmarks for teams or individuals to pursue gives a sense of purpose and completion. Yet, all too often, performance lacks, and disengagement can set in. Why does this happen?
The answer may be related to a connection to a greater mission. Edwin Locke and George Latham established a goal setting theory. The more an individual can relate to the goals they are trying to achieve at work, the higher motivation will be. The theory also asserts that commitment to goals must be established in order for the goals to affect performance. This is a key component – if a goal is set without input or understanding for an employee or team to commit, there will not be a link to performance, and it is unlikely that the goal will have a positive effect.
Goal setting theory naturally poses questions – who should set the goals? Are employees more committed to goals they establish as opposed to organizationally assigned goals? Most people might say that having a goal assigned to someone wouldn’t be very effective. The research from Locke and Latham proved to be surprising – goals which were assigned to individuals resulted in the same level of commitment and performance as goals which were determined by the individual directly! How can this be? It returns to the original assertion of goal setting theory – commitment to goals must be established in order for the goals to affect performance. The commitment is more important and motivating than the goal itself. This is where teams go wrong – setting a goal without input, and without getting sincere buy-in from the people entrusted in its pursuit, will result in a lack of motivation and confusion as to why nothing is changing.
There is another important factor in establishing goals – why? This is a recurring theme in my blog, as well as in leadership theory. Providing transparency and purpose is critical to help people buy-in to a goal, a change, anything at all. And this is why the goal itself matters just as much. In a social service arena, are your staff going to be more motivated chasing an outcome goal for the population you serve, or a billable contract goal? Research and my experience suggest avoiding fiscal goals in a social justice-based line of work. The mission of the organization is what drives people to do good work. Therefore, the mission should drive the goals – and contractual benchmarks are not part of a mission. If you use fiscal or contractual benchmarks to drive performance, you may be doing a significant disservice to the organization and staff – and it can be fixed!
Bringing it all together
The reason people are asked to dedicate their careers to supporting a mission may be the most important factor in how committed and motivated they are in their work. Are you setting the right goals? How do you know? In these cases, a consultant is a fantastic option to assist in analyzing your benchmarks for optimal success. It’s an investment that can make all the difference in your team’s morale.
Questions? Comments? Reach out
ReferencesBruce, A. (2011). Manager's guide to motivating employees (2nd ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (1990). Work motivation and satisfaction: Light at the end of the tunnel. Psychological Science, 1(4), 240–246.Sinek, S. (2009, September 29). Start with why -- how great leaders inspire action | Simon Sinek | TEDxPugetSound [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u4ZoJKF_VuA%26t=5s