The impact ofthought

self-leadership

153

The Journal of ManagementDevelopment, Vol. 18 No. 2, 1999,

pp. 153-169. # MCB UniversityPress, 0262-1711

The impact of thoughtself-leadership on individual

goal performanceA cognitive perspective

Jeffrey L. GodwinDepartment of Business and Economics, West Virginia Wesleyan

College, Buckhannon, USA

Christopher P. NeckDepartment of Management, Pamplin College of Business, Virginia

Tech, Blacksburg, USA, and

Jeffery D. HoughtonPamplin College of Business, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, USA

Keywords Goals, Performance, Self-development

Abstract The purpose of this paper is to apply an existing self-leadership theory to goal-settingtheory in order to propose a mechanism to enhance the effectiveness of individual goalperformance. An integral part of self-leadership is the concept of thought self-leadership (TSL).This perspective suggests that individuals can influence themselves by utilizing specific cognitivestrategies. This article develops a cognitive explanation of how TSL can enhance individual goalperformance.

IntroductionA child asking for a drink of water and a manager selecting which employee topromote have at least one thing in common. Their actions, like most humanbehaviors, are goal directed. Empirical studies demonstrate that settingspecific, challenging, and obtainable goals tends to enhance performance(Locke and Latham, 1984; 1990). Literature reviews generally acknowledge thevalidity and utility of goal-setting theory (Mento et al., 1987; Tubbs, 1986).However, despite the vast amount of research on goal setting, many researchquestions still need to be addressed (Locke and Latham, 1990).

One central area of possible investigation involves the construct ofleadership. Along these lines, Locke and Latham (1990) have posed thefollowing research question: ``What leadership activities and attributes result ineffective goal setting?'' (p. 363). A logical extension of this question leads to amore narrow inquiry: specifically, which leadership behaviors enableindividual goal performance? This question is of particular importance becausein recent years, the organizational reality for many, spurred by the rise of theglobal economy, has been corporate downsizing and reorganization. Thisstreamlining organizational trend has resulted in the utilization of theleadership abilities of all organizational employees, not just upper management

Journal ofManagementDevelopment18,2

154

(Neck and Manz, 1996a). Latham and Locke (1991, p. 239) have lent additionalsupport to this contention:

With the delayering of middle managers in organizations throughout the 1980s, increasingemphasis is being given in industry to the need for employees to self-manage activities thattraditionally were the province of their superiors.

These activities often include goal setting. In fact, now more than ever,employees are being asked to take a leading role in goal-setting activities.Latham and Locke (1991, p. 240) do, however, acknowledge the limitations ofself-direction in goal setting:

Our conclusions about goal setting and self-direction are these: although people are naturalself-regulators in that goal-directedness is inherent in the life process, they are not innatelyeffective self-regulators.

Therefore, if goal-setting theory is to maintain its high degree of relevance inthese rapidly changing times, then processes that impact effective self-regulation of goals must be addressed.

Consequently, the purpose of this paper is to address this gap in theliterature by applying a particular aspect of existing leadership theory, thoughtself-leadership (TSL) (e.g. Manz and Neck, 1991; Neck and Manz, 1992; 1996a;Neck and Milliman, 1994; Neck et al., 1995), to goal-setting theory. In short, wewill propose TSL as a mechanism to enhance the ``effectiveness'' of a particularaspect of goal-setting theory, that is, individual goal performance. In using theterm ``individual goal performance,'' we are primarily referring to anindividual's performance after goals have been established, as opposed to anindividual's performance in setting goals.

We will first provide an overview of the TSL literature. Next, a TSL goal-setting model will be offered in order to provide a theoretical framework for ourdiscussion of the ways in which TSL enhances goal performance. The modelwill address the research question from a social cognition perspective. Finally,implications of our integration of TSL and goal-setting theory will bediscussed.

Thought self-leadership: an overviewSelf-leadership is defined as ``the process of influencing oneself to establish theself-direction and self-motivation needed to perform'' (Manz, 1983; 1986; 1992).This management concept has been derived primarily from the social learningliterature (Bandura, 1977; 1986) and related work in self-control (Bandura, 1969;Cautela, 1969; Goldfried and Merbaum, 1973; Kanfer, 1970; Mahoney andArnkoff, 1978; 1979; Mahoney and Thorensen, 1974; Thorensen and Mahoney,1974). In the organizational literature, the primary focus has been on a relatedprocess usually referred to as self-management (Andrasik and Heimberg, 1982;Hackman, 1986; Mills, 1983). Manz (1986; 1990), along with Neck and Manz(1996b), has further clarified the self-leadership concept by comparing it withtwo other concepts, self-regulation and self-management.

Self-regulation is often described in terms of an ongoing cybernetic control

The impact ofthought

self-leadership

155

model. This model views self-regulation as a process of reducing variation fromestablished standards. Much like a heat sensitive thermostat, the focus is onsensing and then reducing discrepancies from a relatively steady state. In anorganization, existing organizational standards or objectives are analogous tothe current temperature setting, which is maintained by the organizationalcontrol system. In the short run, the process of reducing deviations fromstandards is largely automatic and self-maintaining. That is, as long as currentpolicies, procedures, and rules are followed, deviations (e.g. temperaturechanges) should be reduced. This type of self-regulation represents a relativelylimited level of self-influence because it occurs almost automatically with littleconscious thought to serving external demands.

Self-management, on the other hand, consists of a set of strategies formanaging one's own behavior in order to reduce deviations from existingstandards (Manz, 1986). While an individual's immediate behavior can bedescribed as self-controlled, the purpose of the overall process tends towardserving the requirements of externally set standards. Self-managementstrategies address short-run deviations from standards, but not theappropriateness or the desirability of the governing standards themselves.While self-management does allow employees significant self-influenceregarding how to complete a task in order to meet a standard (as defined by thewider system or higher management), it does not provide self-influenceregarding what should be done and why. Thus, self-management representsonly a moderate level of self-influence.

Finally, self-leadership is a broader concept than self-influence. It includesstrategies for self-management as well as for management of the naturalmotivational value of the tasks and the patterns in one's thinking (Manz, 1983;1986). Self-leadership focuses jointly on behavior and cognition. It alsoaddresses both the reduction of discrepancies from standards and theappropriateness of the standards. It focuses on what should be done and why,in addition to how it should be done. Consequently, the process of self-leadership prescribes a more active and comprehensive role for members in awork system and represents a much more advanced form of self-influence.

If the amount of control and influence possessed by organization members isviewed as falling on a continuum ranging from external control to completeself-control (cf. Manz and Angle, 1986), then self-leadership falls significantlycloser to the complete self-influence end of the spectrum than does self-management. Under conditions of self-leadership, workers play a greater role ininfluencing higher level management decision-making and strategic processes.In terms of a cybernetic control process, organization members are moreinvolved in setting the thermostatic standard as well as acting to achieve thestandard once it is set. This implies active involvement both in short-termprocesses of deviation reduction and in longer-term processes of deviationamplification. Establishing new standards or objectives that offer the potential

Journal ofManagementDevelopment18,2

156

for enhancing the system rather than just maintaining it (e.g. allowingcontinuous improvement rather than maintaining the status quo) is oftenrecommended (Manz, 1990).

An integral component of self-leadership is the concept of TSL. TSLsuggests that employees can influence or lead themselves by utilizing specificcognitive strategies (Manz and Neck, 1991; Neck and Manz, 1992; 1996b; Neckand Milliman, 1994; Neck et al., 1995). Specific TSL cognitive strategies includethe self-management of:

. beliefs and assumptions (the elimination or alteration of distortedindividual beliefs that form the basis of dysfunctional thought processes(Burns, 1980; Ellis, 1975));

. self-dialogue (what we covertly tell ourselves (Ellis, 1962)); and

. mental imagery (the creation and, in essence, symbolic experience ofimagined results of our behavior before we actually perform (Manz,1992)).

Together these strategies contribute to the creation of constructive thoughtpatterns or habitual ways of thinking (Manz, 1983; 1992; Neck and Manz, 1992).

This paradigm posits that constructive thought management througheffective application of these cognitive strategies can enhance individualcognitive processes, behavior, and affective states. (See Manz and Neck, 1991;Neck and Manz, 1992, for a detailed treatment of the conceptual TSLframework.) Empirical evidence tends to support this proposition. In fact,research beyond the scope of the management literature provides support forthe benefits of TSL cognitive strategies. Specifically, the effects of self-talk andmental imagery on performance have been empirically supported in sportspsychology (e.g. Andre and Means, 1986; Clark, 1960; Feltz and Landers, 1983;Kendall et al., 1990; Lee, 1990; Mahoney and Avener, 1977; Meyers et al., 1979;Ryan and Simons, 1981; Wrisberg and Anshel, 1989; Zecker, 1982; Ziegler,1987), clinical psychology (Bonadies and Bass, 1984; Crowder, 1989; Harrell etal., 1981; Meichenbaum and Goodman, 1971; Rosin and Nelson, 1983; Schill etal., 1978; Steffy et al., 1970; Turner et al., 1982; Velten, 1968), counselingpsychology (Baker et al., 1985), and communication (Boice, 1985). In addition,clinical psychologists have described processes through which an individual'sbeliefs and assumptions can result in a variety of cognitive distortions oftenleading to depression (Beck et al., 1979; Burns, 1980; Ellis, 1975).

In contrast, studies in the management literature focusing on the TSLconcept are relatively sparse. Nonetheless, one particularly notable studyinvolved a survey of 3,580 managers who indicated that thought patterns ofhigher performing managers significantly differed from those of lowerperforming mangers (Manz et al., 1988). Furthermore, a laboratory study foundthat dysfunctional thoughts could adversely affect subjective wellbeing and jobsatisfaction (Judge and Locke, 1993). Finally, another study demonstrated thatemployees who participated in a TSL training intervention experienced

The impact ofthought

self-leadership

157

enhanced mental performance, affective states, job satisfaction, and self-efficacy expectations compared to those not receiving the training (Neck andManz, 1996a).

Overall, a wide range of literature supports the relationship between theconstructive utilization of TSL methods and enhanced cognitions, behavior andaffect. Nevertheless, there has been a paucity of research on the application ofcognitive interventions to the goal-setting literature. Consequently, we will nowspecifically examine how self-leadership of the primary TSL components ±beliefs and assumptions, self-dialogue, mental imagery, and overall thoughtpatterns ± can positively affect employees' self-set goal performance. We willfirst provide a brief overview of the four primary TSL elements as shown inFigure 1.

Beliefs and assumptionsIt has been suggested that certain problems faced by individuals are created asa result of dysfunctional thinking (Burns, 1980; Ellis, 1977). These distortedthoughts are based on common dysfunctional beliefs and assumptions that aregenerally activated by potentially troubling situations. Thus, employees canimprove their goal performance by following the prescriptions of Ellis (1977)and Burns (1980). According to these authors, individuals can identify andconfront their dysfunctional beliefs, replacing them with more rational beliefs.

For example, an employee who is upset because he failed to achieve his salesgoals for the current quarter might think, ``I'm going to lose my job. I'm a zero.I'll never be an outstanding salesman.'' This type of thinking is an example ofdysfunctional thought based on a distorted belief called ``all or nothingthinking''. Individuals engaged in all or nothing thinking tend to evaluatepersonal situations in extreme, black and white categories. Such beliefs can bealtered by identifying the dysfunction and altering the thought patterns (Burns,1980). In this case, the employee could challenge his thoughts of losing his job,which could allow him to revise his beliefs regarding himself and his job. Inaddition, he could use constructive self-talk such as, ``I've achieved my sales

Beliefs and Assumptions

Self-Dialogue

Mental Imagery

Thought Patterns

Individual Goal PerformanceFigure 1.

Simplistic relationshipbetween thought

self-leadershipcomponents and

individual goalperformance

Journal ofManagementDevelopment18,2

158

goals in the past. I will examine the potential reasons for failing to achieve mygoal this time. I will learn from this setback. It's not the end of the world. I willdo better next time.''

Self-dialogueSelf-dialogue (self-talk) or self-verbalizations can be simply defined as what wecovertly tell ourselves. Self-talk has been recommended as a self-influencingtool useful for improving the personal effectiveness of employees andmanagers (Manz and Neck, 1991). Research suggests that self-statementscorrespond to emotional states, which in turn affect behaviors and cognitions(Ellis, 1977; Neck and Manz, 1992). Consequently, an employee may be able toenhance his goal performance by controlling his emotional state. A controlledemotional state can be attained through the alteration of an employee's internaldialogue (Manz and Neck, 1991; Neck and Manz, 1992).

Employees who bring their self-defeating internal verbalizations to a level ofawareness may be able to challenge these inner dialogues in order to enhancetheir perceptions of difficult situations. In terms of the earlier example, thesalesperson should pay attention to what he is telling himself. Instead of tellinghimself, ``Hey, you messed up last quarter, you might do it again,'' he could tellhimself out loud, ``I'm going to captivate my audience during my next sales call.I have done my homework well, and if I concentrate I have no doubt in my mindthat my sales presentation will be a success. I'll be well on my way towardachieving my sales goal for the next quarter.'' Over time, constructive self-talkshould become internalized so that employees learn to use it silently in theirown minds, improving their perceptions of difficult situations such asorganizational change.

Mental imageryMental imagery has been defined in various ways. Within the TSL framework,mental imagery refers to imagining the successful performance of a task beforeit is actually completed (Manz and Neck, 1991; Neck and Manz, 1992). Forexample, managers who are required to make public presentations canpotentially enhance their performance by visualizing the completion of asuccessful presentation before they actually begin. Weick's (1979) concept of``future perfect thinking'' provides an interesting parallel argument. Weicksuggests that managers will experience greater successes in planning andanalysis if they view projected events as though they were alreadyaccomplished.

Returning to our original example, the salesperson could mentally picturehimself successfully giving an exciting presentation to a captive audience ofpotential buyers. This mental visualization should enhance the salesperson'sability to make the presentations effectively, his sales performance, and hisself-confidence because he has already performed the actual behavior in his

The impact ofthought

self-leadership

159

mind. On the other hand, if the employee pictured himself making a poor salespresentation to a hostile audience, the resulting lack of self-confidence couldlead to the very failure that was imagined.

Thought patternsManz (1992) describes thought patterns as ``certain ways of thinking about ourexperiences,'' and as ``habitual ways of thinking.'' Individuals tend to engage inboth negative and positive chains of thought (habitual ways of thinking) thataffect emotional and behavioral reactions. These thoughts flow in relativelyconsistently reprobated patterns when triggered by specific circumstances (Neckand Manz, 1992). TSL suggests that beliefs and assumptions, self-talk, and mentalimagery influence one another to produce an individual's thought patterns.

Individuals often adopt one of two opposing thought patterns: ``opportunitythinking'' or ``obstacle thinking'' (Manz, 1992; Neck and Manz, 1992).Opportunity thinking involves a pattern of thoughts focusing on opportunities,worthwhile challenges, and constructive ways of dealing with difficultsituations. Obstacle thinking, on the other hand, involves a focus on thenegative aspects of difficult situations, that is, a focus on reasons to give up andretreat from problems. Opportunity thinkers take a more active role in dealingwith challenges, exerting greater effort and persistence in overcoming thesechallenging situations. Conversely, obstacle thinkers tend to becomediscouraged when faced with difficulties (Manz, 1986; Seligman, 1991).

Thus, another way for an employee to enhance his goal-seeking performanceis to alter his thought patterns. First, the worker should examine his currentthought patterns. If he finds himself focusing extensively on negative aspects(the obstacles) of a particular situation, rather than on positive aspects (theopportunities), then he stands to benefit from a change in thinking patterns. Forexample, salespeople who view sales rejections as an opportunity to reach theirgoals rather than as an obstacle to success, will be more likely to embrace the``set-back'' and benefit from it. If employees succeed in repeatedly reversing thetone of their cognitions over time, a more constructive way of thinking shouldbecome habitual, ultimately enhancing work performance and improvingperceptions of challenging situations.

The thought self-leadership ± goal-setting modelThe preceding discussion was based on a simplistic relationship between TSLstrategies and individual goal performance (see Figure 1). However, thisrelationship is in fact more complex. A more comprehensive explanation of theimpact of TSL on individual goal performance can be derived from the socialcognition research literature. We offer the theoretical framework shown inFigure 2 as a basis for our subsequent discussions.

The central concept of this model is the influence of TSL on schemaactivation in individual goal performance. The relationship between TSL andenhanced performance can be explained through an individual's use of TSL tomanipulate schemata.

Journal ofManagementDevelopment18,2

160

Thought self-leadership and the cognitive processesTSL enables individuals to develop their own leadership potential through self-control of their cognitive processes. The manipulation of schema selectioncreates a framework that has a major impact on the remaining cognitive stages.Thus, self-regulation, through the intentional manipulation of schemaactivation, is central to understanding the impact of TSL on goal performance.

Neisser (1976) has defined schemata as pre-existing structures used fordirecting perceptual activity. Fiske and Taylor (1991, p. 98) elaborate on thisdefinition as follows:

A schema may be defined as a cognitive structure that represents knowledge about a concept

or type of stimulus, including its attributes and the relations among those attributes (Brewerand Nakamura, 1984; Fiske and Linville, 1980; Hastie, 1981: Rumelhart and Ortony, 1977;

Taylor and Crocker, 1981).

Each knowledge structure or schema consists of a network of categoriescomprising ``fuzzy'' sets of related attributes (Feldman, 1981; Fiske and Taylor,

Self-EfficacyGoal Setting

ThoughtSelf-Leadership

Perception

Schema Activation

Category Accessibility

Attribute Sensitization

Cognitive Stages of:1. Encoding2. Storage3. Retrieval

Goal PerformanceFigure 2.Thought self-leadership± goal-setting model

The impact ofthought

self-leadership

161

1991). The cognitive characteristics of the individual receiving the stimulisignificantly affect resulting processes. According to Bargh (1984, p. 15):

Perception, by most accounts, involves an interaction between the environmental stimuli thatare currently present and the individual's readiness to perceive some over others.

It is the second half of this statement, the internal cognitive characteristics ofthe individual, that is the focus of this discussion. TSL's function in enhancingindividual goal performance is explained by its role in changing an``individual's readiness to perceive some [stimuli] over others.''

The way in which an individual views and perceives a given stimulus altershis entire thought process. The information (external stimuli) that is observedand perceived will subsequently be encoded, stored, and retrieved, to influencejudgment and behavior (Fiske and Taylor, 1991). TSL processes help to directan individual's choice to acknowledge and perceive certain stimuli over others,thereby altering his entire cognitive process. It is this cognitive process thatmotivates performance.

Since schemata aid in directing perceptual activities (Neisser, 1976), thequestion of schema activation and selection within an individual is of primeimportance for goal performance. Schemata may be activated in at least twoseparate and distinct ways. The first is ``conceptual-driven'' or ``expectationdriven'' processing (Rumelhart, 1984). For example, an individual might havean expectation of a particular stimulus, thus triggering a particular knowledgestructure. This process begins with an overall conception and moves to specificdetails. On the other hand, certain schemata may be activated due to the effectsof a particular stimulus that involves a larger schema knowledge framework.Rumelhart (1984) refers to this style of processing as ``bottom-up'' or ``data-driven activation.''

TSL tends to enhance individual goal performance through themanipulation of ``conceptual-driven'' schema activation. Specific TSL cognitivestrategies can activate particular schemata through the intentional control ofgoal-relevant cognitive information processing. For example, when a personutilizes self-talk regarding his/her capability to achieve a certain goal, the self-talk becomes a way of intentionally activating a goal-related schema. Theprocess is similar for all of the TSL techniques. Thus, the application of TSLactivates goal-related schemata, which in turn promote goal performance. TSLrepresents a set of cognitive strategies that allow individuals to manipulatetheir own schema in a way that is consistent with effective goal setting andgoal performance (Srull and Wyer, 1986).

TSL's cognitive strategies elicit and strengthen a goal achievement responsesimilar to the concept of ``current concern'' proposed by Klinger (1975) in hiseffort to address incentive relationships. Klinger (1975) defined current concernas a state of being committed to achieving a particular goal. Basing his theorieson prior studies (Corteen and Wood, 1972; Luria and Vinogradova, 1959),Klinger (1975) further suggested that individuals are often sensitized to stimulirelated to their current concern. In addition, the current concern, or goal, elicits

Journal ofManagementDevelopment18,2

162

a cognitive response of accessibility to categories related to that goal (Srull andWyer, 1986). According to Srull and Wyer (p. 505): ``When a category becomesrelatively more accessible in memory, it has a sensitizing effect on bothattentional and perceptual processes,'' thus sensitizing certain goal-relevantcategories, making them more accessible.

The activation of a particular schema enables the categories within thatknowledge structure network to become more accessible. Categoryaccessibility is an important characteristic of the cognitive processes related togoal performance (Srull and Wyer, 1986). Categories are also a key componentin the functioning of schema. The ease by which categories are accessedimpacts the attention paid to and the perceptual filtering of external stimuli.Bruner (1957) first postulated the theoretical basis for category accessibilityand its fundamental utility for coding and identifying environmental events. Inshort, the more accessible a category, the less input needed for categorization tooccur, the wider the range of input accepted into the category, and the morelikely that alternative categories will be ignored. Thus, stimuli receive greaterattention with less processing demands when the characteristics are similar tothe attributes of accessible categories.

To summarize our discussion to this point, TSL impacts goal performancethrough:

. its significant influence on schema activation; and

. the resulting impact upon category accessibility.

Beyond these aspects, TSL's goal performance enhancing qualities can befurther explained through its influence on category attributes.

Categories are ``fuzzy'' sets of attributes that are used to assign membershipand to make inferences about stimuli (Lingle et al., 1984). The clustering ofattributes and their interrelationships determine the structuring of categories(Mervis and Rosch, 1981). The impact of TSL on goal performance is furtherexplained through its role in determining which attributes (within the cluster)are activated during the goal performance process. In the following section, acommon experience will serve as an illustration of this concept.

An example of thought self-leadership in individual goal performanceTSL's strength in relationship to goal performance is in its ability to directlytrigger the sensitization of certain category attributes while minimizing others.Consider an individual who chooses to lose excess weight through reducing theintake of dietary fat. Under traditional goal-setting approaches, the individualmay set the level (goal) at less that 30 grams of dietary fat per day. Theoperationalization of this goal would include monitoring and limiting fat intakeper day. Goal-setting research suggests that a challenging, specific, andobtainable goal will lead to better results than merely trying to ``do your best.''The advantage of TSL in the goal-setting process is that it not only sensitizesthe categories to be accessed, but also stimulates the selection of attributes togovern those categories.

The impact ofthought

self-leadership

163

In the present example, the specific, challenging and obtainable goal is tolimit dietary fat intake to less than 30 grams per day. TSL adds to the strengthof this goal by sensitizing category attributes in the following way. If anindividual repeats (self-talk) to himself/herself before each meal: ``My goal isless than 30 grams of fat per day because fat is bad for my health,'' then certainattributes will be triggered. The verbal expression of the goal increasesperceptual readiness through category accessibility. The use of the category``health'' with the term ``dietary fat'' changes the attributes stimulated. Theterm ``dietary fat'' can have a variety of attributes associated with it. Dietary fatcan signal thoughts such as bad for health, pizza, good taste, and heart attacks.These varying attributes have conflicting influences on goal achievement. Theattributes ``bad for health'' and ``causes heart attacks'' might motivate theachievement of the goal of ``less than 30 grams of fat per day.'' However, theattribute ``creates good taste in food'' could be fairly counter-productive for goalachievement. A person might be tempted to eat pizza that is high in fat solelybecause it tastes good. Therefore, a goal is strengthened when goal-promotingattributes are employed in cognitive processing.

The verbal addition of ``fat is bad for my health'' to the goal statementstrengthens the goal-promoting attributes and minimizes the influence ofcounter-productive attributes. The negative (goal-promoting) attributes of``dietary fat'' are thereby sensitized. The stimulation of the goal-promotingattributes strengthens motivation for goal achievement. TSL uniquelyencourages the manipulation of category attributes, which can result in highergoal performance. Higher levels of goal performance have an added long-termbenefit for an individual's future goal-setting activities and goal performance.TSL tends to enhance a person's self-efficacy due to successful goalachievement and the resulting changes in an individual's self-schema.

Self-schema and self-efficacy in goal performanceA self-schema is a type of cognitive knowledge structure that relates to howone views oneself. Self-schemata are cognitive-affective structures that help toorganize and direct information processing (Fiske and Taylor, 1991). In short,self-schemata represent an individual's experiences in a given area. Goalsetting can enhance performance, and successful performance on a given taskcan build positive experience in a given area. It is therefore possible for goalachievement to have a positive impact on self-schemata (Bandura, 1988; Fiskeand Taylor, 1991). As Cross and Markus have noted (1994, p. 423):

Competence depends not only on one's abilities or attributes but also on those structures ofthe self-concept that represent these attributes or abilities (Markus et al., 1990; Marsh, 1992).

The cognitive links between changes in self-schemata and correspondingchanges in self-efficacy are of vital importance because of the central role ofself-efficacy in goal setting. Indeed, self-efficacy represents another importantintersection between thought self-leadership and goal-setting research. Lockeand Latham (1990, p. 348) have stated: ``Self-efficacy plays a key role in goal

Journal ofManagementDevelopment18,2

164

setting theory ... It predicts goal choice, goal commitment, and performance,and response to feedback.'' This statement is grounded not only in intuitiveappeal but also in empirical research findings. For example, Locke et al. (1984)found very strong effects for self-efficacy on goal-setting activities and taskperformance, even when controlling for ability and past performance. Thus, itappears that goal-setting activities within individuals are largely determinedby their perceived self-efficacy.

Self-efficacy can be defined in terms of an individual's assessment of his/herown capabilities to execute a required course of action leading to successfulperformance (Bandura, 1986). Self-efficacy affects goal-setting activitiesthrough individual self-judgments. Individuals who judge themselves asrelatively more capable tend to set more challenging goals and exhibit greaterlong-term goal commitment (Bandura, 1988; Locke and Latham, 1990; Woodand Bandura, 1989). Indeed, individuals who doubt their own capabilities arelikely to be discouraged by failures and obstacles, while self-assuredindividuals tend to redouble their efforts in the face of failure, persisting untilsuccess is achieved (Bandura and Cervone, 1986).

Clearly, alternative ways of increasing self-efficacy should be examined,especially since self-efficacy appears to be a central part of goal commitment.Thought self-leadership is one such mechanism, which can be utilized inenhancing individual self-efficacy. Indeed, the empirical TSL training-basedstudy mentioned earlier revealed that those who participated in a TSL trainingprogram experienced enhanced self-efficacy over those who were not trained inTSL (Neck and Manz, 1996a).

Another series of studies by Ruvolo and Markus (1992) lends support to theself-efficacy enhancing qualities of TSL. In testing the concept of ``possibleselves,'' which they describe as ``...elements of the self-concept that representwhat individuals could become, would like to become, and are afraid ofbecoming,'' (p. 95), Ruvolo and Markus specifically examined the relationshipbetween visualization and performance. Across several studies, Ruvolo andMarkus report greater success from those individuals who imaginedthemselves as successful. Furthermore, successful individuals were more likelyto accept positive and successful possible selves while rejecting negative andunsuccessful possible selves. In addition, positive images and conceptions werehighly accessible in these subjects, while negative images and conceptionswere relatively inaccessible. This series of studies tends to support not only thepositive relationship of TSL with goal performance, but also the cognitiveexplanation of TSL offered in this paper. Concisely stated, visualization of thefuture self:

. triggers a goal-related schema;

. enables accessibility of relevant categories; and

. sensitizes goal-promoting attributes.

The impact ofthought

self-leadership

165

Propositions and conclusionIn order to summarize the primary points of our integrative model, we assertthe following propositions:

P1 The use of TSL techniques in goal performance increases the number oftimes goal-relevant schemata activate.

P2 The use of TSL techniques in goal performance enables goal-relevantcategories to be more accessible.

P3 The use of TSL techniques in goal performance positively stimulatesgoal-promoting attributes within cognitive categories.

P4 Individuals who use TSL techniques will demonstrate superior goalperformance over individuals who do not.

It is important to note that, while laboratory studies may be the best way toaddress some of these issues, the full spectrum of behavioral research methods,including comparative case studies and field experiments in natural settings,could be used to further refine and test the theoretical positions advanced here.For example, one method of empirically examining the impact of TSL theoryand practices on individual goal performance involves a training intervention-type field study. More specifically, a field study similar to Neck and Manz's(1996a) TSL-based training design could be utilized. The design would includetwo groups (one receiving thought self-leadership training, the other receivingno training, i.e. the control group). Thus, the TSL perspective would becompared to a non-treatment control group in terms of its impact on individualgoal performance. The TSL training would focus on each of the cognitivecomponents of TSL addressed in this paper.

Finally, the application of TSL to individual goal performance has importantimplications for the development of leaders and managers. Furthermore, thisconcept is also important in relationship to the utilization of the cognitiveabilities of all individuals whether supervisors or subordinates. Therecognition that the cognitive strategies of TSL can possibly enhance the goalperformance of individuals expands the domain of leadership theory to includethe leadership of each person within his/her own cognitive processes. Thisdiscussion helps to expand goal-setting theory beyond cognitive explanationsof why goal setting improves performance to specific cognitive strategiesdesigned to enhance goal performance.

References

Andrasik, F. and Heimberg, J.S. (1982), ``Self-management procedures'', in Frederikson, L.W.(Ed.), Handbook of Organizational Behavior Management, Wiley, New York, NY,pp. 219-47.

Andre, J.C. and Means, J.R. (1986), ``Rate of imagery in mental practice: an experimentalinvestigation'', Journal of Sports Psychology, Vol. 8, pp. 123-8.

Baker, S.B., Johnson, E., Kopala, M. and Strout, N.J. (1985), ``Test interpretation competence: acomparison of microskills and mental practice training'', Counselor Education andSupervision, Vol. 25, pp. 31-43.

Journal ofManagementDevelopment18,2

166

Bandura, A. (1969), The Principles of Behavior Modification, Holt, Rhinehart & Winston, NewYork, NY.

Bandura, A. (1977), Social Learning Theory, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

Bandura, A. (1986), Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory,Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

Bandura, A. (1988), ``Self-regulation of motivation and action through goal systems'', inHamilton, V., Bower, G. and Frijda, N. (Eds), Cognitive Perspective on Emotion andMotivation, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.

Bandura, A. and Cervone, C. (1986), ``Differential engagement of self-reactive influences incognitive motivation'', Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 38,pp. 92-113.

Bargh, J. A. (1984), ``Automatic and conscious processing of social information'', in Wyer, R.S. Jrand Srull, T.K. (Eds), Handbook of Social Cognition, Vol. 3, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 1-44.

Beck, A.T., Rush, A.J., Shaw, B.F. and Emery, G. (1979), Cognitive Theory of Depression, GuilfordPress, New York, NY.

Boice, R. (1985), ``Cognitive components of blocking'', Written Communication, Vol. 2, pp. 91-104.

Bonadies, G.A. and Bass, B.A. (1984), ``Effects of self-verbalizations upon emotional arousal andperformance: a test of rational-emotive theory'', Perceptual and Motor Skills, Vol. 59,pp. 939-48.

Brewer, W.F. and Nakamura, G.V. (1984), ``The nature and functions of schemas'', in Wyer, R.W.Jr and Srull, T.K. (Eds), Handbook of Social Cognition, Vol. 1, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ,pp. 119-60.

Bruner, J.S. (1957), ``On perceptual readiness'', Psychological Review, Vol. 64, pp. 131-42.

Burns, D.D. (1980), Feeling Good: The New Mood Therapy, William Morrow, New York, NY.

Cautela, J.R. (1969), ``Behavior therapy and self-control: techniques and implications'', in Franks,C.M. (Ed.), Behavior Therapy: Appraisal and Status, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY,pp. 323-40.

Clark, L.V. (1960), ``Effect of mental practice on the development of a complex motor skill'',Research Quarterly, Vol. 31, pp. 560-9.

Corteen, R.S. and Wood, B. (1972), ``Automatic responses to shock-associated words in anunattended channel'', Journal of Experimental Psychology, Vol. 94, pp. 308-13.

Cross, S.E. and Markus, H.R. (1994), ``Self-schemas, possible selves, and competent performance'',Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 83, pp. 423-38.

Crowder, R.G. (1976), Principles of Learning and Memory, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.

Ellis, A. (1962), Reason and Emotion in Psychotherapy, Lyle Stuart, New York, NY.

Ellis, A. (1975), A New Guide to Rational Living, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

Ellis, A. (1977), The Basic Clinical Theory of Rational-Emotive Therapy, Springer, New York, NY.

Feldman, J. (1981), ``Beyond attribution theory: cognitive processes in performance appraisal'',Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 66, pp. 127-48.

Feltz, D.L. and Landers, D.M. (1983), ``The effects of mental practice on motor skill learning andperformance: a meta-analysis'', Journal of Sport Psychology, Vol. 5, pp. 25-57.

Fiske, S.T. and Linville, P.W. (1980), ``What does the schema concept buy us?'', Personality andSocial Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 6, pp. 543-57.

Fiske, S.T. and Taylor, S.E. (1991), Social Cognition, 2nd ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.

Goldfried, M.R. and Merbaum, M. (Eds) (1973), Behavior Change through Self-control, Holt,Rhinehart & Winston, New York, NY.

The impact ofthought

self-leadership

167

Hackman, J.R. (1986), ``The psychology of self-management in organizations'', in Pollack, M. andPerloff, R.O. (Eds), Psychology and Work: Productivity, Change and Employment, APA,Washington, DC.

Harrell, T.H., Chambless, D.L. and Calhoun, J.F. (1981), ``Correlational relationships between self-statements and affective states'', Cognitive Therapy and Research, Vol. 5, pp. 159-73.

Hastie, R. (1981), ``Schematic principles in human memory'', in Higgins, E.T., Herman, C.P. andZanna, M.P. (Eds), Social Cognition: The Ontario Symposium, Vol. 1, Erlbaum, Hillsdale,NJ, pp. 89-134.

Judge, T.A. and Locke, E.A. (1993), ``Effect of dysfunctional thought processes on subjective well-being and job satisfaction'', Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 78, pp. 475-90.

Kanfer, F.H. (1970), ``Self-regulation: research, issues and speculations'', in Neuringer, C. andMichael, J.L. (Eds), Behavior Modification in Clinical Psychology, Appleton-Century-Crofts,New York, NY.

Kendall, G., Hrycaiko, D., Martin, G.L. and Kendall, T. (1990), ``The effects of an imageryrehearsal, relaxation, and self-talk package on basketball game performance'', Journal ofCounseling Psychology, Vol. 32, pp. 263-71.

Klinger, E. (1975), ``Consequences of commitment to and disengagement from incentives'',Psychological Review, Vol. 82, pp. 1-25.

Latham, G.P. and Locke, E.A. (1991), ``Self-regulation through goal setting'', OrganizationalBehavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 50, pp. 212-47.

Lee, C. (1990), ``Psyching up for a muscular endurance task: effects of image content onperformance and mood state'', Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, Vol. 12, pp. 66-73.

Lingle, J.H., Altom, M.W. and Medin, D.L. (1984), ``Of cabbages and kings: assessing theextensibility of natural object concept models to social things'', in Wyer, R.S. Jr and Srull,T.K. (Eds), Handbook of Social Cognition, Vol. 1, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 71-117.

Locke, E.A. and Latham, G.P. (1984), Goal Setting: A Motivational Technique that Works,Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

Locke, E.A. and Latham, G.P. (1990), A Theory of Goal Setting and Task Performance, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

Locke, E.A., Frederick, E., Lee, C. and Bobko, P. (1984), ``Effect of self-efficacy, goals, and taskstrategies on task performance'', Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 69, pp. 241-51.

Luria, A.R. and Vinogradova, O.S. (1959), ``An objective investigation of the dynamics ofsemantic systems'', British Journal of Psychology, Vol. 50, pp. 889-105.

Mahoney, M.J. and Arnkoff, D.B. (1978), ``Cognitive and self-control therapies'', in Garfield, S.L.and Borgin, A.E. (Eds), Handbook of Psychotherapy and Therapy Change, Wiley, NewYork, NY, pp. 689-722.

Mahoney, M.J. and Arnkoff, D.B. (1979), ``Self-management: theory, research and application'', inBrady, J.P. and Pomerleau, D. (Eds), Behavioral Medicine: Theory and Practice, Williamsand Williams, Baltimore, pp. 75-96.

Mahoney, M.J. and Avener, M. (1977), ``Psychology of the eÂlite athlete: an exploratory study'',Cognitive Therapy and Research, Vol. 1, pp. 135-41.

Mahoney, M.J. and Thorensen, C.E. (Eds) (1974), Self-control: Power to the Person, Brooks/Cole,Monterey, CA.

Manz, C.C. (1983), The Art of Self-leadership: Strategies for Personal Effectiveness in Your Lifeand Work, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

Manz, C.C. (1986), ``Self-leadership: toward an expanded theory of self-influence processes inorganizations'', Academy of Management Review, Vol. 11, pp. 585-600.

Journal ofManagementDevelopment18,2

168

Manz, C.C. (1990), ``Beyond self-managing work teams: towards self-leading teams in the workplace'', in Woodman, R. and Pasmore, W. (Eds), Research in Organizational Change andDevelopment, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, pp. 273-99.

Manz, C.C. (1992), Mastering Self-leadership: Empowering Yourself for Personal Excellence,Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

Manz, C.C. and Angle, H. (1986), ``Can group self-management mean a loss of personal control?Triangulating on a paradox'', Group and Organization Studies, Vol. 11, pp. 309-34.

Manz, C.C. and Neck, C.P. (1991), ``Inner leadership: creating productive thought patterns'', TheExecutive, Vol. 5, pp. 87-95.

Manz, C.C., Adsit, D., Campbell, S. and Mathison-Hance, M. (1988), ``Managerial thought patternsand performance: a study of perceptual patterns of performance hindrances for higher andlower performing managers'', Human Relations, Vol. 41, pp. 447-65.

Markus, H., Cross, S.E. and Wurf, E. (1990), ``The role of the self-system in competence'', inSternberg, R.J. and Kolligian, J. Jr (Eds), Competence Considered, Yale University Press,New Haven, CT, pp. 205-26.

Marsh, H.W. (1992), ``Content specificity of relations between academic achievement andacademic self-concept'', Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 84, pp. 35-42.

Meichenbaum, D. and Goodman, J. (1971), ``Training impulsive children to talk to themselves: ameans of developing self-control'', Journal of Abnormal Psychology, Vol. 77, pp. 115-26.

Mento, A.J., Steel, R.P. and Karren, R.J. (1987), ``A meta-analytic study of the effects of goalsetting on task performance: 1966-1984'', Organizational Behavior and Human DecisionProcesses, Vol. 39, pp. 152-83.

Mervis, C.B. and Rosch, E. (1981), ``Categorization of natural objects'', in Rosenzweig, M.R. andPorter, L.W. (Eds), Annual Review of Psychology, Vol. 32, Annual Reviews, Palo Alto, CA,pp. 89-115.

Meyers, A.W., Cooke, C.J., Cullen, J. and Liles, L. (1979), ``Psychological aspects of athleticcompetitors: a replication across sports'', Cognitive Therapy and Research, Vol. 3, pp. 361-6.

Mills, P.K. (1983), ``Self-management: its control and relationship to other organizationalproperties'', Academy of Management Review, Vol. 8, pp. 445-53.

Neck, C.P. and Manz, C.C. (1992), ``Thought self-leadership: the impact of self-talk and mentalimagery on performance'', Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 12, pp. 681-99.

Neck , C.P. and Manz, C.C. (1996a), ``Thought self-leadership: the impact of mental strategiestraining on employee behavior, cognition, and emotion'', Journal of OrganizationalBehavior, Vol. 17, pp. 445-67.

Neck, C.P. and Manz, C.C. (1996b), ``Total leadership quality: integrating employee self-leadership and total quality management'', in Ghosh, S. and Fedor, D. (Eds), Advances inthe Management of Organizational Quality, Vol. 1, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, pp. 39-77.

Neck, C.P. and Milliman, J.F. (1994), ``Thought self-leadership: finding spiritual fulfilment inorganizational life'', Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 9, pp. 9-16.

Neck, C.P., Stewart, G. and Manz, C.C. (1995), ``Thought self-leadership as a framework forenhancing the performance of performance appraisers'', Journal of Applied BehavioralScience, Vol. 31, pp. 278-302.

Neisser, U. (1976), Cognition and Reality, W. H. Freeman, San Francisco, CA.

Rosin, L. and Nelson, W.M. (1983), ``The effects of rational and irrational self-verbalizations onperformance efficiency and levels of anxiety'', Journal of Clinical Psychology, Vol. 39,pp. 208-13.

Rumelhart, D.E. (1984), ``Schemata and the cognitive system'', in Wyer, R.S. Jr and Srull, T.K.(Eds), Handbook of Social Cognition, Vol. 1, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 161-88.

The impact ofthought

self-leadership

169

Rumelhart, D.E. and Ortony, A. (1977), ``The representation of knowledge in memory'', inAnderson, R.C., Spiro, R.J. and Montague, W.W. (Eds), Schooling and the Acquisition ofKnowledge, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 99-136.

Ruvolo, A.P. and Markus, H.R. (1992), ``Possible selves and performance: the power of self-relevant imagery'', Social Cognition, Vol. 10, pp. 95-124.

Ryan, E.D. and Simons, J. (1981), ``Cognitive demand, imagery, and frequency of mental rehearsalas factors influencing acquisition of motor skills'', Journal of Sport Psychology, Vol. 3,pp. 35-45.

Schill, T., Monroe, S., Evans, R. and Ramanaiah, N. (1978), ``The effects of self-verbalizations onperformance: test of the rational-emotive position'', Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, andPractice, Vol. 15, pp. 2-7.

Seligman, M.E.P. (1991), Learned Optimism, Alfred Knopf, New York, NY.

Srull, T.K. and Wyer, R.S. Jr (1986), ``The role of chronic and temporary goals in socialinformation processing'', in Sorrentino, R.M. and Higgins, E.T. (Eds), Handbook ofMotivation and Cognition: Foundations of Social Behavior, Guilford Press, New York, NY,pp. 503-49.

Steffy, R.A., Meichenbaum, D. and Best, J.A. (1970), ``Aversive and cognitive factors in themodification of smoking behavior'', Behavioral Research and Therapy, Vol. 8, pp. 115-25.

Taylor, S.E. and Crocker, J. (1981) ``Schematic bases of social information processing'', inHiggins, E.T., Herman, C.P. and Zanna, M.P. (Eds), Social Cognition: The OntarioSymposium, Vol. 1, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 89-134.

Thorensen, C.E. and Mahoney, M.J. (1974), Behavioral Self-control, Holt, Rhinehart, & Winston,New York, NY.

Tubbs, M.E. (1986), ``Goal-setting: a meta-analytic examination of the empirical evidence'',Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 71, pp. 474-83.

Turner, P.E., Kohl, R.M. and Morris, L.W. (1982), ``Individual differences in skilled performancefollowing imagery of bilateral skill'', Perceptual and Motor Skills, Vol. 55, pp. 771-80.

Velten, E. (1968), ``A laboratory task for induction of mood states'', Behavioral Research andTherapy, Vol. 6, pp. 473-82.

Weick, K.E. (1979), The Social Psychology of Organizing, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.

Wood, R.E. and Bandura, A. (1989), ``Social cognitive theory of organizational management'',Academy of Management Review, Vol. 14, pp. 361-84.

Wrisberg, C.A. and Anshel, M.H. (1989), ``The effect of cognitive strategies on the free throwshooting performance of young athletes'', The Sport Psychologist, Vol. 3, pp. 95-104.

Zecker, S.G. (1982), ``Mental practice and knowledge of results in the learning of a perceptualmotor skill'', Journal of Sport Psychology, Vol. 4, pp. 52-63.

Ziegler, S.G. (1987), ``Comparison of imagery styles and past experience in skills performance'',Perceptual and Motor Skills, Vol. 64, pp. 579-86.