Goal Setting and Negotiation Performance: A Meta-Analysis

Abstract

We review, through meta-analysis, the effects of goals and goal attributes on the outcomes received by negotiators. Despite a long-standing interest in aspirations and goals in negotiation, researchers have not fully integrated aspiration theory and goal setting theory in group activities such as negotiation. Results of 22 research reports indicated that negotiators who held optimal (i.e. specific and challenging) goals consistently achieved higher profits than negotiators with suboptimal or no goals. Goal difficulty had a strong, positive influence on profit outcomes. More difficult goals led to higher outcomes than less difficult goals. The effect of goals was stronger in the cases where (a) the negotiator’s opponent did not have a strong goal, (b) there were rewards for performance, (c) negotiations were not face-to-face, and (d) the negotiator had task experience. Also, as predicted by goal setting theory, no effect was found for participation in goal setting. Additionally, it is proposed that the interactive and interdependent nature of the negotiation task provides grounds for further development of goal setting and aspiration theory.