Skip to main content
Department of Psychiatry Department of Psychiatry
  1. HOME
  2. Research
  3. Programs, Centers & Labs
  4. IN STEP Center
  5. Tools and Resources
  6. Definitions of Team Constructs
  7. Team Processes
  8. Action Phase Processes
  9. Goal Progress Monitoring

Goal Progress Monitoring

Definition

"Tracking task and progress toward mission accomplishment, interpreting system information in terms of what needs to be accomplished for goal attainment, and transmitting progress to team members." (Marks et al., 2001, p. 363)

Key References

  • Koo, M., & Fishbach, A. (2012). The Small-Area Hypothesis: Effects of progress monitoring on goal adherence. Journal of Consumer Research, 39(3), 493–509. https://doi.org/10.1086/663827
    • Multi-study analysis of small areas and goal progress monitoring in consumer contexts, proposed two focuses of goal progress monitoring:
      • 1. Accumulated
      • 2. Remaining.
    • Found that at the intial stages of goal pursuit, directing attention to the progress achieved increases goal adherence, while during final stages of goal completion, attention to progress achieved decreases goal adherence.
  • Rapp, T. L., Bachrach, D. G., Rapp, A., & Mullins, R. (2014). The role of team goal monitoring in the curvilinear relationship between team efficacy and team performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 99(5), 976–987. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036978
    • Observed a curvilinear relationship between team efficacy and performance such that moderate levels of efficacy resulted in the highest performance when team goal monitoring was low and a reciprocal curvilinear effect when goal monitoring was high (created own measure).
  • Harkin, B., Webb, T. L., Chang, B. L., Prestwich, A., Conner, M., Kellar, I., Benn, Y., & Sheeran, P. (2016). Does monitoring goal progress promote goal attainment? A meta-analysis of the experimental evidence. Psychological Bulletin, 142(2), 198–229. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000025
    • Meta-analysis, found that targeted interventions are successful at increases frequency of progress monitoring behaviors which in turn was related to stronger goal attainment.

Recent Articles

  • Larson, N. L., McLarnon, M. J. W., & O'Neill, T. A. (2020). Challenging the “static” quo: Trajectories of engagement in team processes toward a deadline. Journal of Applied Psychology, 105(10), 1145–1163. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl000047
    • Developed and tested a theoretical account of team process trajectories and team engagement in process toward a deadline. Found that goal progress monitoring is positvely related to team performance in the presence of time pressure.
  • Mistry, S., Kirkman, B. L., Hitt, M. A., & Barrick, M. R. (2022). Take it from the top: How intensity of TMT joint problem solving and levels of interdependence influence quality of strategy implementation coordination and firm performance. Journal of Management Studies, 60(2), 400–427. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12838
    • Developed and tested a theoretical model of the interactive effects of joint problem solving, strategy implementation, coordination, and team performance. Found that intensity of top management teams' joint problem solving is positively related to the quality of their strategy implementation coodination, and that quality of strategy implementation coordination mediates the relationship betwen interactive effects and performance.
  • Waring, S., Moran, J., & Page, R. (2020). Decision‐making in multiagency multiteam systems operating in extreme environments. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 93(3), 629–653. https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12309
    • Analyzed observations during large scale disaster response exercises to examine what inter-team processes are used to coordinate decisions. Found that first responders either gather information as opposed to taking action, or take action without deliberate consideration of their options to form a plan.