However, just as swords have two sides, goal setting may sometimes be the obstacles that may restrict the organization’s performance. The first and most essential disadvantage of goal setting is that with challenging and attainable goals the organization or individual will still be taking excessive risks (United States Office of Personnel Management, 1995). That is because people are frequently failing in achieving challenging goals.For example, if I set a goal, say, I will produce a fascinating research essay, which can help me get at least 80% of the mark, with 12 hours hard work, that is challenging and maybe achievable. However, I will probably be ending with failure. Secondly, goal setting may raise stress among those employees who are not so competent with the tough goals.
Because there are a variety of competences among employees, and goals cannot be set to satisfy all the employees, the relatively incompetent ones will feel quite stressed and unable to perform very well.The third disadvantage lies on dishonesty and cheating on individual goal setting (United States Office of Personnel Management, 1995). Because some managers or employees are afraid of being punished or fired because of failing to achieve the goals, they may prepare some untrue reports to show that they have achieved the goals. Another two negative aspects include omitting non-goal areas and addressing short-term goals which leads to losing long-term organizational objectives (United States Office of Personnel Management, 1995).Moreover, people are not very enthusiastic in achieving more when goals are achieved. However, there are some practical techniques of goal setting that can maximize the benefits and minimize the risks.
M. B. O. is one of the most debated planning techniques that are concerned with applying goal setting. It is defined as “a process of joint objective setting between a supervisor and subordinate” (Schermerhorn, 2001, p. 150). As the employees are greatly involved in the goal setting process in M.
B. O, it is very unlikely that they will make goals that are too difficult or too easy to achieve. Therefore, the organization will still carry risks, but not excessive ones; and the when the employees will not break the ‘ceiling’ easily. And also because the goals are set between a supervisor and subordinate, the supervisor will communicate the long-term goals of the entire organization to the employee to keep the employee’s goal setting on the correct track.The personal goal setting of subordinate will therefore not be just focusing on the short-term objectives. However, it has some shortages, too.
The most troublesome shortage is that it cost a lot to train this sort of manager (Inkson & Kolb, 2002). And it is very likely to create a lot of quantitative objectives, which may lead to a misunderstanding of the ultimate goal (Inkson & Kolb, 2002). In conclusion, goal setting is very crucial to organizations. Without it, the organization will lose the direction and all the process of management cannot work properly.It helps the entire organization co-ordinate and performs much better, it facilitates controlling by making sure that the performance is easy to assess and therefore makes it easier to reward and motivate the employees by the achievement assessed by that. However, there are some pitfalls that goal setting may generate. Although goal setting may raise potential risks of the organizations and dishonest reporting and impose stress on employees, M.
B. O. can neutralize some of the disadvantages.
Generally speaking, because of the importance of goal setting, it needs to be taken seriously and done carefully.