h1

THE IMPACT OF TARGET SETTING ON MANAGERIAL MOTIVATION AND PERFORMANCE

July 20, 2011

Problem Formula and Research Goals Comparing the definitions of motivation and commitment reveals an obvious similarity. Both have been described as energizing forces with implications for behavior. However, that (Pinder, 1998) described motivation is a set of energizing forces. Also, that (Meyer, 2001; Herscovitch, 2001) defined commitment as a force that binds an individual to a course of action. This implies that motivation is a broader concept than commitment and that commitment is one among a set of energizing forces that contributes to motivated behavior. On the linking of managerial perception on motivation and performance, a statement (Baiman, 1982, 1990) that the relationship of middle managers and the organisation is in conflict, that‟s not in seriously management control, the accomplishment of targets can‟t be setting. Whereas, the need to focus on three views in participating of managers‟ on designing the change development, specify these targets effectively, and getting strategy scope to accomplish them. In this era, some companies tries to be aware in obtaining their target largely, these are managerial behavior and their decision can act as a bridge for. Thus, based on that statement, the research questions we explain are:

 

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: