From an organizational theory perspective, Scott and Davis (2007) identified five critical functions of goals: guiding, motivating, symbolizing, justifying, and evaluating. Considering how each function serves different purposes at various levels of a hierarchical organization can help demonstrate the dynamic nature of how different goal functions can serve different purposes depending on the source, application, perspective, and other contextual factors, as follows:

• The rational systems perspective sees organizations as formal collectives built to pursue specific goals. From the rational systems perspective, a leader might emphasize how the cognitive function of goals can guide decision-making and action.
• The natural systems perspective sees the organization as a social system that seeks to survive. From the natural systems perspective, the leader may emphasize goals that can serve as philosophical tools that members use to gather and allocate resources for competition.
• The open systems perspective views organizations as groups and individuals with different interests. These individuals and groups dynamically interact in an environment composed of organizations with competing goals. From the open systems perspective, the leader may focus on the symbolic functions of goals that affect the organization’s ability to build credibility, establish relationships, gather resources, and manage personnel.
• The conventional view sees how goals cause action. But some analysts argue that goals can serve a justifying function that allows people to make sense of and explain past actions. In other words, “behavior can precede rather than stem from goals” (Scott & Davis, 2007, p. 207).

All these perspectives and levels of the organization use goals to evaluate performance. Still, they will not necessarily consider the same goals.

Translating vague goals into specific goals

An external analysis of an organization through rational, natural, or open-systems lenses provides a myopic view of how goal functions can dynamically interact inside an organization. Simon’s (1997) Theory of Administrative Behavior offers a framework for understanding how the vague goals established by leaders translate into increasingly specific goals and actions as they filter down the organizational hierarchy and how the goal attainment behaviors of individual employees support the collective action that supports vague organizational goals (Scott & Davis, 2007).

Simon established a goals hierarchy in which vague goals set at the top of the organization become increasingly more specific as they filter to the organization’s bottom. The more specific the goal, the more it defines the behavior of the person responsible for achieving the goal. As Simon explained, “through the hierarchical structure of ends, behavior attains integration and consistency,” which influences the behavior members’ goal behavior toward achieving the organization’s ends (p. 74).

Founder goals

Considering Simon’s goals hierarchy against the functions of goals identified by Scott and Davis (2007) shows that the founders may use symbolic goals to justify the existence of the organization. The founders typically establish symbolic goals that set the identity, values, and purpose of the organization. These symbolic goals are enshrined in the organizational vision statement (Collins & Lazier, 1995).

Executive goals

Executive-level management might stress the motivational function of goals to align organizational members with the organization's vision (Scott & Davis, 2007). Executives may communicate the strategic level goals that define the opportunities the organization will pursue (Collins & Lazier, 1995).

Manager goals

From the operational management level, middle management may emphasize the cognitive aspects of goals. They figure out how to translate high-level aspirations into more specific goals that organizational functions will achieve to fulfill their part of the strategic plan (Scott & Davis, 2007).

Line manager goals

At the tactical level of the organization, front-line managers may break the functional goals into specific goals that guide the daily behaviors of the workers (Bateman & Snell, 2014).

Employee goals

At the bottom of the organizational hierarchy, workers are most likely to apply the justification function of goals to supply an accounting of what they did. Members throughout the organization evaluate goals to measure individual and group performance (Scott & Davis, 2007).

Goal mechanics

In hierarchical organizations, leaders attempt to align goal setting at strategic, tactical, and operational levels so that the organizational members and processes can focus on advancing together toward a common purpose. Bateman and Snell (2014) demonstrate how the rigid hierarchical planning model translates the broad, long-term goals established by top management into more specific short-term goals as they flow down the organization. Top managers establish strategic goals, which serve as major targets for the organization’s lasting survival, value, and growth. Strategic managers typically focus on establishing broad targets for organizational growth, market share, profitability, quality and quantity of offerings, customer service, stakeholder relations, and contributions to society.

References

Bateman, T. S., & Snell, S. A. (2014). Management: Leading & collaborating in a competitive world (11th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill Irwin.

Collins, J., & Lazier, W. C. (1995). Beyond Entrepreneurship: Turning your business into an enduring great company. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Scott, W. R., & Davis, G. F. (2007). Organizations and organizing: Rational, natural, and open system perspectives. New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall.

Simon, H. (1997). Administrative behavior: A study of decision-making processes in administrative organizations (4th ed.). New York: Free Press.