Article

Impact of management by objectives on organizational productivity.

Journal of Applied Psychology (Impact Factor: 4.31). 03/1991; 76(2):322-336. DOI: 10.1037/0021-9010.76.2.322

ABSTRACT Goal setting, participation in decision making, and objective feedback have each been shown to increase productivity. As a combination of these 3 processes, management by objectives (MBO) also should increase productivity. A meta-analysis of studies supported this prediction: 68 out of 70 studies showed productivity gains, and only 2 studies showed losses. The literature on MBO indicates that various problems have been encountered with implementing MBO programs. One factor was predicted to be essential to success: the level of top-management commitment to MBO. Proper implementation starts from the top and requires both support and participation from top management. Results of the meta-analysis showed that when top-management commitment was high, the average gain in productivity was 56%. When commitment was low, the average gain in productivity was only 6%. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)

7 Bookmarks
 · 
1,836 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Abstract Purpose – This paper seeks to explore how principals use their time when the requirement exceeds the activities are desirable. In the scholarly debate it has been pointed out the heads think that too much time is devoted for the financial and administrative issues, or to solve acute problems. This means that there is not enough time to work with educational issues. The purpose of this paper is to clarify how principals use the time they have devoted for the educational area and what activities they prioritize. It will also increase the knowledge of reasons behind their prioritizing and reflect on some of the consequences. Results relate to the question if introduction of performance measures has increased a short-term perspective on student performance or if it works as a suitable tool for the principals to achieve the schools goals and to create more effective schools in the long run. The question if stakeholders can get required insight by the performance measures as they are designed today and if the principals got the right incentives is raised. Design/methodology/approach – A quantitative approach is used and a mail questionnaire was distributed to the principals in all upper secondary schools in Sweden and a comparative cross-sectional study was conducted. Findings – Principals’ perceptions suggest that, their prioritization when working with educational issues is influenced by a more short-term perspective and that they prioritize teaching, which have a much faster impact on student outcome, over long-term school development which facilitate the conditions for the former. These findings increase the insight into the need, for as well stakeholders as principals, to develop performance measures to stimulate change when needed. Practical implications – These findings have implications on the direction of the development of performance measures. The result points out the lack of transparence for stakeholders and uncovers the need to know when change and long-term development is ongoing or not. The study show how principals need incentives for prioritizing these activities and that this can be done by the stakeholder by designing required measurements for as well teaching as long-term school development when change is needed or to maintain a successful process. Originality/value – This paper fulfills an identified need to study how the performance measures of today can be complemented with measures for stakeholders for increased insight in ongoing activities with development and required change for long-term school success.
    Journal of Organizational Change Management 07/2014; 27(3):520-531. · 0.74 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study advances our understanding of morale and its influence on project success. Our research validates a model of project team morale as a multifaceted variable, comprised of project team attitudes, contextual performance and behavioral expectations. Each of these facets is significantly important in explaining project success. Further, we argue that morale is a complex amalgam of these facets, and unlike past research, we demonstrate the mediating effects between project morale facets and project success (using SEM). Our results are based on a sample of 222 core members and project managers in 71 project teams, originating in organizations from various industries in the U.S. All the hypothesized relationships at the project team level of analysis achieved statistical significance. The aggregated results show that project team morale explains 25% of the variance in project success. Findings provide project leaders with a tool on how to enhance project success by influencing project team morale, rather than solely focusing on traditional project planning and controlling activities
    Academy of Management Conference, Hawaii; 09/2005
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The failures of performance management (PM) systems are well known, as is the popularity of downsizing as a corporate strategy. We suggest that the factors integral to the success of PM, such as employee–organization trust, manager–employee communication, goal setting, and reinforcement contingencies, are undermined by organizational downsizing. Broken PM systems increase the likelihood of future downsizing, yet make it difficult to conduct performance-based downsizing. With proper encouragement by HRD professionals and the correct use of employee-centered PM, which may include performance-based downsizing, organizations may break this cycle. Suggested practical implementations include the use of Daniels’s (1985) concept of Performance Management and of Pfeffer and Sutton’s (2006) concept of evidence-based management to (a) implement alternative cost reduction techniques (b) implement contingent PM, that may integrate performance-based downsizing (c) develop HRD specialists and managers to develop and evaluate these integrated systems and (d) reevaluate PM competencies and processes after downsizing has occurred.
    Human Resource Development Review 09/2013;