April 6th, 2022 
FACILITATING SUCCESSFUL BEHAVIORCHANGE: BEYOND GOAL SETTING TO
GOAL FLOURISHING
Kenneth NowackEnvisia Learning, Inc., Santa Monica, California
Most successful coaching engagements encourage clients to start, increase, decrease,modify, or stop behaviors that contribute to their effectiveness and performance on thejob (Fogg, n.d.). Successfully sustaining new or altered behaviors over time until theybecome a habit is even more difficult (Nowack, 2009). Goal intentions (e.g., “I want tobe a more participative and involvement-oriented leader”) have been found in a recentmeta-analysis to be a weak predictor of acquiring new habits and account for approxi-mately 28% of the variance in successful behavior-change efforts (Gollwitzer &Sheeran, 2006). Translating insight in coaching engagements to deliberate, varied, andongoing practice has been shown to be associated with long-term successful behaviorchange (Nowack & Mashihi, 2012). This paper reviews current issues and best practicesin goal intentions, goal striving, and goal flourishing to maximize coaching success withclients.
Keywords: goal striving, goal setting, implementation intentions, behavior change,habits
Goal setting and the initiation of new behaviors and sustaining them over time is particularlychallenging for most individuals. However, we are all creatures of habit. In fact, on the basis ofexperience-sampling diary studies using student and community samples, approximately 45% ofeveryday behaviors tend to be repeated in the same location almost every day (Neal, Wood, &Quinn, 2006; Wood & Rünger, 2016). It is surprising to note that people report a heterogeneous setof actions that vary in habit strength each day, including diverse and established behaviors such asexercise, eating, and daily activities (Wood, Quinn, & Kashy, 2002; Wood, Tam, & Guerrero, 2005).This paper will attempt to summarize current evidence and practice behind goal intentions, goalsetting/planning processes, and goal striving resulting in successful creation of new habits (goalflourishing) by addressing six important questions (see Figure 1). Initially, it will be useful to definespecific characteristics of coaching goals and then present important factors associated with goalflourishing, including some common myths about goal striving and giving up/quitting goals.
Recent neuroscience research provides both a framework for understanding the resistance toinitiating new habits and the challenges around goal flourishing. For example, there appears to bebroad and meaningful individual differences in our motivation to try new behaviors, a willingnessto take risks, and a tendency to seek novel and intense experiences (Holmes, Hollinshead, Roffman,
This article was published Online First April 17, 2017.Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Kenneth Nowack, Envisia Learning, Inc.,
2208 6th Street, Santa Monica, CA 90405. E-mail: [email protected]
Thi
sdo
cum
ent
isco
pyri
ghte
dby
the
Am
eric
anP
sych
olog
ical
Ass
ocia
tion
oron
eof
its
alli
edpu
blis
hers
.T
his
arti
cle
isin
tend
edso
lely
for
the
pers
onal
use
ofth
ein
divi
dual
user
and
isno
tto
bedi
ssem
inat
edbr
oadl
y.
Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research © 2017 American Psychological Association2017, Vol. 69, No. 3, 153–171 1065-9293/17/$12.00 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/cpb0000088
153
Smoller, & Buckner 2016). Using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), Holmes et al. (2016)measured the size of particular regions of the brain for each participant and measured self-reportedtraits associated with sensation-seeking and impulsivity as well as alcohol, tobacco, and caffeineusage. The strongest links occurred in brain areas related to the ability to regulate emotions andbehavior most strongly associated with the anterior cingulate and middle frontal gyrus. Changes inthose brain structures also significantly correlated with participants’ self-reported tendency to act onimpulse and with heightened use of alcohol, tobacco, or caffeine.
Current research suggests that availability and type of social support (Chiaburu, Van Dam, &Hutchins, 2010; Martin, 2010; Orehek & Forest, 2016) as well as regulation of emotions are equalto, or even more important than, cognitions in predicting both intention and initiation of new habits(Lawton, Conner, & McEachan, 2009). These findings imply an important role for coaches inconsidering the social-support climate of clients, helping them to manage their emotional reactionsand consequences for engaging in behavioral-change efforts as well as assessing “readiness tochange” stages that are associated with successful behavior change.
For example, one of the purposes of using 360-degree feedback in coaching interventions is toprovide information to coaches to illuminate strengths as well as potential areas for development(Bracken, Rose, & Church, 2016; Nowack & Mashihi, 2012). Some negative reactions to suchfeedback might actually be motivating for successful behavior change (Atwater & Brett, 2005), butneuroscience research provides answers about why “underestimators” (whose self-ratings are morecritical than the ratings of their observers) or those who interpret the feedback as judgmental orhurtful are disengaged and lack motivation to change behavior (Woo, Sims, Rupp, & Gibbons,2008). In addition, interpersonal judgment and social evaluation tend to elicit strong stress reactions,with cortisol levels in one’s system being elevated 50% longer when the stressor is interpersonalversus impersonal (Dickerson & Kemeny, 2004). As a result, individuals who negatively interpretfeedback and experience emotional hurt, rejection, and pain tend to have both blunted motivation toinitiate behavior change and diminished readiness for creating implementation intentions that arecrucial for successful behavior change. Fortunately for practitioners, there are some individual-change models that help optimize understanding, acceptance, and action that are based on feedbackto ensure successful behavior change.
Six Important Ques�ons about Goal Se�ng, Goal Striving, and Goal Flourishing
1. What are the key characteris�cs of goals?
2. If goal inten�ons aren’t generally effec�ve to facilitate behavior change what works be�er?
3. Goal striving: When are clients most mo�vated?
4. How long does it take for new habits to form?
5. When should clients “hold” and when should they “fold” in goal striving?
6. Does prac�ce make perfect?
Figure 1. Six questions about goal setting.
Thi
sdo
cum
ent
isco
pyri
ghte
dby
the
Am
eric
anP
sych
olog
ical
Ass
ocia
tion
oron
eof
its
alli
edpu
blis
hers
.T
his
arti
cle
isin
tend
edso
lely
for
the
pers
onal
use
ofth
ein
divi
dual
user
and
isno
tto
bedi
ssem
inat
edbr
oadl
y.
154 NOWACK
Building on the process models of feedback and change by Gregory, Levy, and Jeffers (2008),Koroleva (2016), and London and Smither (2002), I have proposed a more specific individualbehavioral-change model that draws heavily on evidence-based research in the health-psychologyand behavioral-medicine literature (see Figure 2). The 3-E model of individual behavior change(Enlighten, Encourage, and Enable; Nowack, 2009) represents a merging of recognized individualbehavioral-change theories and models, including the theory of planned behavior (Ajzen, 1991),self-efficacy and social– cognitive theory (Bandura, 1977), the health-belief model (Becker, 1974),the transtheoretical model of change (TTM; Prochaska & Velicer, 1997), and extension of theelements of goal-setting theory and performance posited by Locke and Latham (2002). Each of thesetheories and models should be useful to all coaches who are attempting to influence both insight/awareness and successful behavior change with their clients.
Successful coaching engagements foster both self-efficacy and self-management of clients (Joo,2005; Grover & Furnham, 2016). Self-management theorists agree upon two important componentsthat involve cognitive, emotional, and behavioral challenges in goal flourishing (i.e., the successfuladoption and targeted results of goal pursuits): goal setting and goal striving (Mann, De Ridder, &Fujita, 2013). Goal setting (Fogg Behavior Grid; Fogg, 2012) typically involves two concepts—thevalence of behaviors (start, increase, decrease, stop, do differently) and frequency (one time,sometime, and all of the time). Goal striving typically involves the implementation of actions andbehaviors related to goals that have been set, redefining goals during the pursuit, managing lapsesfrom distractions, and dealing with loss of energy or resources that interferes with successfulaccomplishment. Although often temporal, there are situations in which reappraisal of goals oftenfollows perceived or real obstacles and challenges (e.g., if the goal is unrealistic or resources neededto accomplish the goal change, such as for financial reasons).
Clients tend to initially identify goals (Koestner, Lekes, Powers, & Chicoine, 2002) in whichthey have an intrinsic stake (“What is in it for me?”) and when they perceive what others expect ordesire of them (e.g., 360-degree-feedback results by one’s boss or direct reports to change specificleadership practices). Self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985), readiness to change(Prochaska & Velicer, 1997), the 3-E model of individual change (Nowack, 2009), and other relatedmodels all suggest that a client’s level of motivation and self-efficacy is a critical predictor ofsuccessful goal adoption, maintenance, and adherence over time.
Hierarchy of goals also shape what clients will focus on. For example, if a specific goal (e.g.,deploying a stress-management technique such as mindfulness meditation) competes with anothergoal (e.g., spending more time with one’s children after work) based on finances, time, or energy,then clients are unlikely to maintain it over time (Riediger & Freund, 2004). Therefore, helpingclients to explore both inhibitors and promoters of goals would appear to be a useful exercise bycoaches to facilitate goal completion and success. In addition, research by Kruglanski and colleagues(2002) suggests that when client goals have more than one payoff, clients are more likely to pursue
• Accurate Insight
• Identifying Signature Strengths
• Ideal Self vs. Real Self
Enlighten
• Motivation• Self-Efficacy• Skill Building• Goal
Implementation
Encourage• Practice Plans• "Nudge"
Reminders• Social Support• Relapse
Prevention• Evaluation
Enable
Figure 2. Enlighten, Encourage, and Enable individual change model.
Thi
sdo
cum
ent
isco
pyri
ghte
dby
the
Am
eric
anP
sych
olog
ical
Ass
ocia
tion
oron
eof
its
alli
edpu
blis
hers
.T
his
arti
cle
isin
tend
edso
lely
for
the
pers
onal
use
ofth
ein
divi
dual
user
and
isno
tto
bedi
ssem
inat
edbr
oadl
y.
155BEYOND GOAL SETTING TO GOAL FLOURISHING
all of them because doing so maximizes the outcome with the same effort (e.g., soliciting andaccepting feedback from direct reports might simultaneously increase engagement of employeeswhile enhancing perceived agreeableness as a personality trait of the leader).
What Are the Key Characteristics of Goals?
There are several important characteristics that directly influence the goal pursuit that individualsengage in (Koo & Fishbach, 2010). Some of the most important characteristics include difficulty(e.g., easy vs. challenging), proximity of the end state (e.g., short term vs. long term), number ofgoals to tackle at one time (e.g., single vs. multiple), type of goal (e.g., learning vs. performance),and motivational mindset (e.g., avoidance vs. approach). Each of these five characteristics of goalswill be briefly described here.
Easy Goals Versus Challenging/Stretch Goals
Previous studies have traditionally emphasized that goals should not be overly ambitious asexemplified by the SMART goal acronym, which suggests that goals should be specific, measurable,attainable, realistic, and timely (Latham, 2003). However, current research suggests that challenginggoals lead to greater effort, focus, and persistence than moderately difficult or easy goals and thatSMART goals might not be very effective in fully operationalizing the complexity needed fordeliberate practice (Nowack, 2015). Such “big, hairy, audacious goals,” or BHAGs, help provide aclear vision of what is to be measured and evaluated at the end of a large-scale behavior-changeeffort (Collins, 1999).
It has also been suggested that people who perceived their goal as difficult to attain reportedhigher positive emotion, an increase in job satisfaction, and perceptions of occupational success(Latham & Locke, 2006). In fact, there is some evidence that difficult and unrealistic goals mightactually inspire, rather than interfere with, goal pursuit (Latham & Locke, 2013; Linde, Jeffrey,Finch, Ng, & Rothman, 2004). Other research suggests that difficulty of a coaching goal does notappear to impact how successful the coaching engagement actually is in terms of overall goalattainment (Sonesh et al., 2015).
Consider the following implications for coaching: Some researchers argue that lowering thedifficulty of goals, rather than enhancing motivation, is the desired strategy for successful behaviorchange (Fogg, 2012). In summary, encouraging clients to set challenging goals is more likely tostimulate initial readiness to change. However, when faced with obstacles or challenges, reducingbarriers to achieving goal success by modifying their difficulty might be a good strategy to followfor clients in coaching engagements (Fogg, 2012).
Short-Term Focus Versus Long-Term Focus
Goals are often distinguished by how far forward they project into the future. Schunk (2001)suggests that short-term goals are achieved more quickly and result in higher motivation and betterself-regulation than more distant or long-term goals. Furthermore, research suggests that if long-term goals must be established, subdividing or “chunking” them into more manageable tiny actionsor steps can produce greater benefits (i.e., goal attainment).
The time frame for completion needs to be reasonable for goals to be attained (Latham & Locke,2006). However, individuals are more likely to maintain goals in the face of obstacles and challengeswhen more time remained for goal pursuit than when less time remained (Schmidt & Deshon, 2007),suggesting that for shorter-term goals, experiencing setbacks early will not necessarily lead toextinction of the initial goal. In addition, people who wrote out their short-term goals, shared theircommitment to complete the goals with others, and communicated progress with others wereapproximately 33% more successful than those who did not document their goals, share intent, andcommunicate progress with others (Matthews, 2012). Finally, a single focus on the goal withouthaving a specific backup plan appears to be predictive of goal achievement given a longer timeframe to accomplish desired results (Shin & Milkman, 2016).
Thi
sdo
cum
ent
isco
pyri
ghte
dby
the
Am
eric
anP
sych
olog
ical
Ass
ocia
tion
oron
eof
its
alli
edpu
blis
hers
.T
his
arti
cle
isin
tend
edso
lely
for
the
pers
onal
use
ofth
ein
divi
dual
user
and
isno
tto
bedi
ssem
inat
edbr
oadl
y.
156 NOWACK
Consider the following implications for coaching: For most coaching engagements, clientsshould be encouraged to focus on specific and short-term goals and the underlying steps andbehaviors to facilitate progress and success. Building in tracking and monitoring systems (Harkin etal., 2016; Webb, Joseph, Yardley, & Michie, 2010) and encouraging clients to share their intentionswith goal mentors might also be useful strategies to optimize successful achievement of bothshort-term and long-term goals (Cole-Lewis & Kershaw, 2010; De Leon, Fuentes, & Cohen, 2014;Fanning, Mullen, & McAuley, 2012; Mashihi & Nowack, 2013).
Single Goals Versus Multiple Goals
Behavior-change efforts are typically individualistic, based on a myriad of individual and environ-mental factors, and tend to be progressive, regressive, or even static (Nowack, 2009). Mixedevidence supports the argument that multiple simultaneous efforts (e.g., behaviors planned toimprove multiple competencies at the same time) tend to be equal or even more effective thanfocusing on single goals because they reinforce quick benefits (Achtziger, Gollwitzer, & Sheeran,2008; Hyman, Pavlik, Taylor, Goodrick, & Moye, 2007). On the other hand, several studies suggestthat focus on a single implementation intention might be superior to multiple goal intentions (Dalton& Spiller, 2012). Additional research extends these findings by showing that formulating multipleplans in the service of the same goal is also not beneficial (Verhoeven et al., 2013).
Consider the following implications for coaching: Individuals can accomplish more than onegoal at a time, assuming that these goals do not conflict with each other in some way (Locke &Latham, 2002). As such, coaches should raise realistic concern about overall success when clientsexpress an interest in working simultaneously on multiple goals in their initial contracting agreementor throughout the coaching engagement. For example, rather than making multiple implementationintentions at once, a phased approach might be more successful. In this way, one new behavioralgoal or habit could be targeted with an implementation intention first, and only when the new desiredbehavior has been reached, according to some metric of agreed-up improvement by the coach andclient, might a new goal be addressed.
Learning Goals Versus Performance Goals
An individual’s goal orientation and personality can accurately describe the goals that they chooseand the methods used to pursue those goals (DeShon & Gillespie, 2005). A performance versuslearning characteristic of goals (Elliott & Dweck, 1988) involves the achievement of a specificstandard (e.g., performance goal such as “lose 15 pounds”) as opposed to the development of aspecific skill (e.g., learning goal such as “acquiring the skill to practice mindfulness meditation”).Instead of focusing on the end result, a learning goal focuses attention on the discovery of effectivestrategies, skills, or techniques to attain and sustain desired results (Seijts, Latham, Tasa, & Latham,2004). Latham and Locke (2013) argued that it is best to set a learning goal when an individual lacksthe ability to perform the task and to set a performance (outcome) goal when the person has theability to attain a desired level of performance.
When trying to accomplish a learning goal, the individual will learn to master all of thenecessary skills that are associated with acquiring that goal. In the process, he or she may ask forfeedback and reflect on progress to master whatever it takes to learn the new skill. On the other hand,trying to attain a specific performance goal can place additional cognitive demands that couldinterfere (e.g., choking) with goal accomplishment (e.g., Beilock, Carr, MacMahon, & Starkes,2002).
Consider the following implications for coaching: Performance goals can be appropriate whenthe necessary skills to perform a task are already mastered and the primary focus is to exert moreeffort to reach a higher level of performance. Seijts, Latham, Tasa, and Latham (2004) found thatindividuals with learning goals demonstrated the following advantages over those with performancegoals:
1. They took the time necessary to acquire the knowledge to effectively perform the task andto analyze the task-relevant information that was available to them.
Thi
sdo
cum
ent
isco
pyri
ghte
dby
the
Am
eric
anP
sych
olog
ical
Ass
ocia
tion
oron
eof
its
alli
edpu
blis
hers
.T
his
arti
cle
isin
tend
edso
lely
for
the
pers
onal
use
ofth
ein
divi
dual
user
and
isno
tto
bedi
ssem
inat
edbr
oadl
y.
157BEYOND GOAL SETTING TO GOAL FLOURISHING
2. They showed an increase in self-efficacy as a result of the discovery of appropriatestrategies for task mastery. Other research supports the notion that learning goals areespecially effective in enhancing self-efficacy and self-regulation (Schunk, 2001).
3. They had a significantly higher commitment to their goals than did those with a perfor-mance goal.
It is a good idea to set up goals that will allow your clients to focus on mastering the skillsnecessary to perform a new behavior as well as goals that target specific outcomes. For instance, aclient may have a performance goal of creating a more productive team or losing a specific amountof weight. However, by establishing a learning goal, the client would focus on acquiring the skillsto build a high-performance team or to maintain a healthy weight in order to ensure that the targetsor outcomes are successfully accomplished.
Avoidance Goals Versus Approach Goals
Goals that clients have can either be focused on securing desired outcomes (approach goals) or theycan target avoiding unwanted outcomes (avoidance goals). Avoidance goals, aiming to eliminate anundesired end state (e.g., “avoid being overly controlling in my staff meetings”), tend to have moreambiguous strategies associated with them and should not typically be used (Carver & Scheier,1982).
Because approach goals tend to be more effective than most avoidance goals, one strategy forbehavior-change interventions is to encourage clients to redefine any avoidance goals into approachgoals (e.g., “be more participative and listen more to my staff during our meetings before I suggestmy own ideas”). In addition, people are more likely to engage in an approach goal when they haveset a low-high range goal (e.g., lose 2 to 4 pounds this week) versus when they have set asingle-number goal (Scott & Nowlis, 2013). Coaches should consider encouraging their clients toutilize more low-high range goals when appropriate for specific desired behaviors.
Consider the following implications for coaching: With some goals, clients may be able to usea “substitution goal” (e.g., “in meetings, soliciting suggestions and input from others instead ofexpressing my own ideas and opinions”) or a different goal for which the avoidance goal isinstrumental (e.g., “seeking input and then summarizing the ideas of others” is instrumental for “notbeing seen as being an overly directive or authoritative leader”). The Fogg Behavior Grid (Fogg,2012) offers a comprehensive typology of strategies and drivers for coaches to use with their clients,focusing on either approach goals (start doing, doing more, or doing differently) or avoidance goals(stop doing or doing less), and it provides examples for when the end result is one time (e.g., runa marathon), sometimes (i.e., situational or periodic), or all of the time (i.e., become an ongoingbehavioral ritual).
If Goal Intentions Are Not Generally Effective to Facilitate Behavior Change,What Works Better?
Research suggests that attempts to change people’s intentions alone may not always result insuccessful maintenance of behavior over time (Lawton et al., 2009). Many people express a strongdesire and intent to become more effective and to try new behaviors, but often they never reallyinitiate or sustain a new change for very long (e.g., relapse). Some research suggests that theperceived importance of the goal (i.e., concern for the desired end point of the behavioral change)might be the best predictor of those who will initiate new behaviors (whether they keep it up or not).On the other hand, the individual factors of self-efficacy, perceived control, and being clear aboutthe disadvantages (i.e., the cons of behavioral change) are stronger predictors of clients whosuccessfully maintain new behaviors over time (Rhodes, Plotnikoff, & Courneya, 2008).
In general, clients are most strongly committed to goals that are desirable (attractive) andattainable (Oettingen et al., 2009). However, neither of these factors guarantees that these judgmentstranslate into actual practice (Oettingen & Gollwitzer, 2007). Several studies provide evidence thatcognitively contrasting a desired future state with impeding reality (mental contrasting) effectively
Thi
sdo
cum
ent
isco
pyri
ghte
dby
the
Am
eric
anP
sych
olog
ical
Ass
ocia
tion
oron
eof
its
alli
edpu
blis
hers
.T
his
arti
cle
isin
tend
edso
lely
for
the
pers
onal
use
ofth
ein
divi
dual
user
and
isno
tto
bedi
ssem
inat
edbr
oadl
y.
158 NOWACK
increases motivation and commitment to implement a goal (Gallo, Cohen, Gollwitzer, & Oettingen,2013; Oettingen, Marquardt, & Gollwitzer, 2012; Oettingen et al., 2009).
These studies suggest that a structured approach to comparing and contrasting future successversus realistic barriers determines the energy that will be used to commit and pursue personal/professional goals. Simply, coaches could help clients directly reflect and compare their vision of adesired future (e.g., enhanced professional performance or adopting new behaviors) with the currentsituation that may hinder goal pursuit and success (e.g., barriers, temptations, and obstacles). Thistechnique appears to be consistent with “self-talk” motivational-interviewing strategies used toenhance readiness to change (e.g., Passmore, 2007) and comparing the “real” versus “ideal” self inthe intentional-change model posited by Boyatzis and Akrivou (2006).
In summary, intentions to change behavior are weak predictors of actual behavior change(Nowack, 2015). However, the use of implementation intentions (practice plans) appears to besignificantly more robust (Gollwitzer & Sheeran, 2006). A meta-analysis involving more than 8,000participants in 94 independent studies revealed a medium-to-large average effect size (d � 0.65) ofimplementation intentions on goal achievement in various domains (e.g., interpersonal, environ-mental, health) on top of the effects of mere goal intentions (Conner & Higgins, 2010; Gollwitzer& Sheeran, 2006). These findings provide coaches with a specific approach to contracting andsupporting goal initiation to translate them into ongoing practice plans using an if-then model withclients (See Figure 3). As such, implementation intentions are defined as if-then plans that have beenshown to cause sustained changes in behavior and acquisition of new habits (Gollwitzer & Sheeran,2009).
The “if” part of the goal is the trigger or cue and the “then” part of the goal is a statement ofthe specific behavior desired to be modified (e.g., stop, start, do more, do less). Some habit triggerswill be situation-based (e.g., “When I feel anxious, I will practice mindfulness meditation to calmme down” or “When I notice the other person speaking, I will seek to understand what is being saidbefore I share my own ideas”) and others will be time-based (e.g., “When it is Monday, Wednesday,and Friday morning at 7:00 a.m. for the next month, I will attend my 50-min yoga class” or “At eachweekly staff meeting, I will solicit the ideas of my staff and summarize them before sharing my ownthoughts and suggestions”). Both types might be relevant to use depending on the specific goal beingtargeted. Fogg (2012) and Nowack (2015) have suggested that one of the most potent triggers ispairing a new behavior with an existing habit (e.g., if a client has a routine in the morning that isalready established, then it is easier to link a new behavior to that existing habit).
Studies show that the “if” component of implementation intentions facilitates the accessibilityof situations, and linking “if” with “then” automates the behavioral response specified in the “then”
Goal Intention Example
Practice Plan Example
“To stay calm in anxiety producing
situations”
“If my heart starts to race, then I will begin using my
mindfulness breathing technique and focus on how relaxed I begin to
feel”
Figure 3. Practice plan/implementation intention example.
Thi
sdo
cum
ent
isco
pyri
ghte
dby
the
Am
eric
anP
sych
olog
ical
Ass
ocia
tion
oron
eof
its
alli
edpu
blis
hers
.T
his
arti
cle
isin
tend
edso
lely
for
the
pers
onal
use
ofth
ein
divi
dual
user
and
isno
tto
bedi
ssem
inat
edbr
oadl
y.
159BEYOND GOAL SETTING TO GOAL FLOURISHING
component (Gollwitzer & Sheeran, 2009). Implementation intentions are powerful for coaches touse with clients because they systematically facilitate deliberate practice to ensure both neuroplas-ticity and long-term goal success (Conner & Higgins, 2010; Mashihi & Nowack, 2013).
Goal Striving: When Are Clients Most Motivated?
Models such as the Transtheoretical Behavior Change Model (TTM; Prochaska & Velicer, 1997)suggest that clients are ready to change when they are ready to change. The TTM refers to readinessstages of differential motivation with respect to both goal initiation and striving (e.g., precontem-plation to maintenance stages). With respect to goal striving, clients have already moved throughcontemplation, preparation, and action stages, but not all clients have the motivation to continuewith their goal pursuits despite some progress being made. In practice, client motivation typicallyvaries, so what do we know about when clients are most motivated in a cycle of goal initiation andstriving?
In general, the most common indicator for a subjective evaluation of a “best day at work” isperceived progress in a goal by an individual or team (Amabile & Kramer, 2011). Amabile andKramer (2011) investigated a total of 26 project teams composed of 238 individuals who were askedto report daily on moods, motivations, perceptions of the work environment, what work wasaccomplished, and what events stood out in their mind (nearly 12,000 diary entries). Steps forward(progress) occurred on 76% of people’s best mood days and setbacks on only 13% of those days.Therefore, progress— even a small step forward—was highly correlated with the number of daysemployees reported being in a good mood, although causality between mood and progress was notpossible to discern in this study (Amabile & Kramer, 2011). Nonetheless, this finding and theresearch of others (e.g., Fogg, 2012) suggest that coaches should emphasize and reinforce tiny stepsof progress by their clients to maintain a high level of motivation and positive affect throughout thecourse of a coaching engagement.
When clients work toward goals they monitor their progress in two ways—what they haveachieved so far and how much they have left to do. It appears that clients switch between themethods depending on how close they are to reaching a goal. Research with university studentsasked to pursue a specific goal (e.g., correcting errors in an essay) showed that students wereless motivated halfway through the tasks, which likely reflects the point where they switch theirfocus from how much they achieved to how much they had left to do (Bonezzi, Brendl, & DeAngelis, 2011). Despite the widely accepted belief that motivation to reach a goal increases asclients approach the desired end state, these findings suggest that this is not always the case and thisvery much depends on the standard of reference used to monitor progress.
Client motivation within coaching engagements typically follows a U-shaped pattern such thatmotivation is highest at the beginning and end of a goal pursuit rather than in the middle (Bonezziet al., 2011; Touré-Tillery & Fishbach, 2011, 2012). Because beginning and end (vs. middle)positions with respect to goal setting are often arbitrarily determined, one thing coaches can do withclients is to reduce the length of the “middle” by dividing goal pursuits into subgoals requiringsmaller actions and dates to follow up. This should increase the likelihood that clients will continueto successfully maintain their efforts toward goal completion. Taken together, these studies suggestmotivation is most likely to fluctuate most in the middle of goal striving (i.e., slacking is more likelyin the middle of a goal pursuit); therefore, this is the optimum time for coaches to explore new waysto enhance the readiness-to-change level of their clients to avoid potential derailment or outrightfailure.
How Long Does It Take for New Habits to Form?
One important outcome in coaching engagements and leadership-development initiatives is suc-cessful habit and behavior change based on targeted goals of the client. Neuroscience researchprovides practitioners with a better understanding about how long it takes, on average, for new
Thi
sdo
cum
ent
isco
pyri
ghte
dby
the
Am
eric
anP
sych
olog
ical
Ass
ocia
tion
oron
eof
its
alli
edpu
blis
hers
.T
his
arti
cle
isin
tend
edso
lely
for
the
pers
onal
use
ofth
ein
divi
dual
user
and
isno
tto
bedi
ssem
inat
edbr
oadl
y.
160 NOWACK
behaviors to become comfortable and automatic. It is important to point out that there is a differencebetween changes at the neural level (neuroplasticity) and resulting behaviors becoming moreefficient and leading to visible performance outcomes that are meaningful for clients (Kleim &Jones, 2008).
For example, the posterior hippocampus (visual-spatial memory center) in London taxi-cabdrivers has been shown to increase in size with years of experience (Woollett, Spiers, & Maguire,2009), extensive piano practicing has been associated with enhanced plasticity of white-matter areasof the brain (Bengtsson et al., 2005), adults attending a juggling course showed detectable changesin brain structure within 3 months (Draganski et al., 2004), and short-term practice of mindfulnessmeditation has resulted in significant changes in the brain measured by functional magneticresonance imagery (fMRI; Tang, Hölzel, & Posner, 2015). However, previous and current practiceof new behaviors is required to translate observable neural change into skill improvement and actualhealth benefits.
To illustrate, doctors who have previous video-game experience and currently report playinggames make significantly fewer endoscopic surgical errors than surgeons who have no previousvideo experience (Rosser et al., 2007). Finally, in a waiting-list control study using objectivemeasures of autoimmune lesions, clients with multiple sclerosis practicing a comprehensive stress-management program demonstrated significantly less development of disease (exacerbations andnew lesions), but no evidence of subsequent improvement was observed when clients discontinuedusing these coping techniques 26 weeks after the study (Mohr et al., 2012). At a practical level,getting clients to “start” new habits and behaviors does appear to create significant and observableneural change, but unless the behavior is maintained, it is unlikely that the advantages will betranslated into enhanced performance (“use it or lose it”).
Research by Lally, Van Jaarsveld, Potts, and Wardle (2010) suggests that new behaviors canbecome automatic, on average between 18 and 254 days, but it depends on the complexity of whatnew behavior a client is trying to put into place as well as their personality. They studied volunteerswho chose to change an eating, drinking, or exercise behavior and tracked them for success.Participants completed a self-report diary, which they entered on a website log, and were asked totry the new behavior each day for 84 days. For the habits, 27 chose an eating behavior, 31 a drinkingbehavior (e.g., drinking water), 34 an exercise behavior, and 4 did something else (e.g., meditation).Analysis of all of these behaviors indicated that it took 66 days, on average, for this new behaviorto become automatic and natural. The range was anywhere from 18 to 254 days (median 66 days).The mean number of days varied by the complexity of the habit: drinking � 59 days, eating � 65days, and exercise � 91 days.
Additional research suggests that interleaving (mixing up deliberate practice) results in evengreater skill performance and success than merely repeating new behaviors over and over (Lin et al.,2013). A substantial body of research has established that interleaving (defined as practicingdifferent skills in quick succession) significantly improves both learning and performance instudents and adults (e.g., Rohrer, 2012; Rohrer, Hedrick, & Steershick, 2015).
Therefore, creating new habits requires tremendous self-control and emotional regulation toreach a limit of self-reported automaticity for performing an initially new behavior. Taken together,practitioners should consider that translating a goal into a new habit for most clients might takelonger than expected (approximately 2 months or more of deliberate practice) assuming that clientshave an appropriate motivation level for readiness to change throughout a coaching engagement. Asa result, shorter-term coaching engagements and complex behavior-change efforts might requiregreater repetition and diversity of practice (interleaving) to demonstrate effectiveness.
When Should Clients “Hold” and When Should They “Fold” in Goal Striving?
Research in both health and organizational psychology suggests that several five-factor models(FFMs) are significantly associated with goal initiation, goal striving, and successful behaviorchange over time (Hampson & Friedman, 2008; Kern & Friedman, 2008; Lyubomirsky, King, &Diener, 2005; Smither, London, & Reilly, 2005). For example, a review of the training-transfer
Thi
sdo
cum
ent
isco
pyri
ghte
dby
the
Am
eric
anP
sych
olog
ical
Ass
ocia
tion
oron
eof
its
alli
edpu
blis
hers
.T
his
arti
cle
isin
tend
edso
lely
for
the
pers
onal
use
ofth
ein
divi
dual
user
and
isno
tto
bedi
ssem
inat
edbr
oadl
y.
161BEYOND GOAL SETTING TO GOAL FLOURISHING
literature by Zu Knyphausen-Aufsess, Smukalla, and Abt (2009) suggested that learners who arehigher in emotional stability and more extroverted are most likely to maximize training success interms of knowledge acquisition and skill improvement over time.
It seems both intuitive and reasonable that persistence and drive would generally be associatedwith goal striving and successful behavior change. In a series of studies by Angela Duckworth andcolleagues, individuals demonstrating “grit” were more likely to be successful in both academic andjob-related goals and measures of performance (Duckworth, Peterson, Matthews, & Kelly, 2007).Grit (defined as passion and perseverance for long-term goals) accounted for an average of 4% ofthe variance in success-outcome measures (e.g., educational attainment among two samples ofadults [N � 1,545 and N � 690], academic GPA among Ivy League undergraduates [N � 138], andretention in two classes of U.S. Military Academy, West Point, cadets; Duckworth et al., 2007).
However, a recent meta-analysis by Credé, Tynan, and Harms (2016) found that grit, astypically measured, appears to be only moderately correlated with diverse performance and retentionoutcomes and is strongly confounded with the construct of conscientiousness. Their results, basedon 584 effect sizes from 88 independent samples representing 66,807 individuals, suggest that thetrue utility of the grit construct may solely be due to perseverance, which overlaps with FFMmeasures of conscientiousness (Credé et al., 2016). As such, continuing in the face of goal challengeand pressure (i.e., “holding”) would appear to be generally advantageous for successful goalattainment and maximized by those high in grit, achievement orientation, and drive (i.e., consci-entiousness)— until it is not.
According to several studies, quitting (“folding”) may be a better coping strategy for thewell-being of clients when facing unattainable goals. In a series of studies, psychologists GregoryMiller and Carsten Wrosch have found that people who feel comfortable quitting when faced withunattainable goals may have better mental and physical health than those who persevere and pushthemselves to succeed (Wrosch, Miller, Scheier, & Brun de Pontet, 2007; Wrosch, Scheier, &Miller, 2013). These findings build on their previous research, which found that those persistentindividuals experienced higher levels of an inflammatory protein called C-reactive protein (anindicator of inflammation) and increased cortisol (Miller & Wrosch, 2007). Given that chronicinflammation represents a risk factor for various diseases (e.g., heart disease; Miller, Chen, & Zhou,2007), these findings provide evidence for another mechanism potentially linking goal disengage-ment, psychological well-being, and physical-health outcomes.
As such, effort and persistence are not always the most adaptive responses to the experience ofgoal-related obstacles and challenges. On the basis of these findings, coaches might be moresupportive for clients, in the face of unattainable goals, to actually disengage and explore goalreengagement. In fact, goal-disengagement and goal-reengagement capacities are typically notstrongly correlated with each other, making it possible for practitioners to emphasize both behaviors(Wrosch, Scheier, Carver, & Schulz, 2003). Support for this perspective is provided by King andHicks (2006), who investigated how individuals cope with lost opportunities and mistaken expec-tations and their association with health, happiness, and personality development. The happiestindividuals acknowledged loss, did not spend much time ruminating on the past, and more easilydisengaged from failure and “what might have been” in the past. Overall, they were more likely tobe focused on and committed to current goals, passions, and life activities (King & Hicks, 2006).
Does Practice Make Perfect?
Most coaches and clients resonate with the old saying that “practice generally makes perfect.” Assuch, it is commonly accepted that individual differences in performance reflect differences in theamount of deliberate and accumulated practice (activities that are structured and repetitive toenhance effectiveness in any domain). Or, at least if you do something long and hard enough, thenyou will likely become an expert.
In fact, there is a big difference between “experts” and those “who are expert” in what they do(Ericsson, 2007). In a 1996 book coedited by Anders Ericsson and others titled The CambridgeHandbook of Expertise and Expert Performance, two of the authors concluded that great perfor-
Thi
sdo
cum
ent
isco
pyri
ghte
dby
the
Am
eric
anP
sych
olog
ical
Ass
ocia
tion
oron
eof
its
alli
edpu
blis
hers
.T
his
arti
cle
isin
tend
edso
lely
for
the
pers
onal
use
ofth
ein
divi
dual
user
and
isno
tto
bedi
ssem
inat
edbr
oadl
y.
162 NOWACK
mance comes mostly from two things: regularly obtaining concrete and constructive feedback anddeliberate practice with difficult tasks (Ericsson, 1996a, p. 4). For example, the authors found thatthe best skaters spent 68% of their practice doing really hard jumps and routines compared withthose who were less successful (they spent only about 48% of their time doing the same difficultthings). Ericsson (1996b) defined “deliberate practice” to mean focused, structured, serious, anddetailed attempts to get better. That means it has to be challenging and difficult (i.e., practicing themost difficult tasks).
In two other studies, Ericsson, Krampe, and Tesch-Romer (1993) recruited musicians fromdifferent levels of accomplishment and asked them to retrospectively estimate the amounts of timeper week they had engaged in deliberate practice. Group averages were highest for the mostaccomplished musicians. On average, the “best” violinists had accumulated more than 10,000 hr ofdeliberate practice, compared with less than 8,000 hr for the “good” violinists and not even 5,000hr for the least accomplished “teachers.” Ericsson et al. (1993) concluded that “individual differ-ences in ultimate performance can largely be accounted for by differential amounts of past andcurrent levels of practice” (p. 392).
Brooke Macnamara and her colleagues from Princeton University recently conducted the largestreview and meta-analysis of studies exploring the relationship between deliberate practice andperformance in several domains (Macnamara, Hambrick, & Oswald, 2014). Their research also teststhe widespread “10,000-hour rule” popularized in several books (Colvin, 2008; Gladwell, 2008) thatsuggests that it takes 10,000 hr of practice to become an expert in any given skill domain. Theirresearch included 111 independent samples, with 157 effect sizes and a total sample of 11,135participants (Macnamara et al., 2014). They explored the deliberate practice and performancerelationship in various domains and two sets of factors. The first factor was based on thepredictability of a task or how often the behavior might be expected to be performed (e.g., handlingan aviation emergency to running each day) and the second was how the previous research wasconducted and how practice was actually measured (e.g., recall or log).
Their findings contradict the popular urban myth and claim that individual differences inexpertise and performance are largely accounted for by the amount of deliberate practice a personengages in over time. In fact, the percentage of variance accounted for by deliberate practice in fivespecific domains was as follows: games 26%, music 21%, sports 18%, education 4%, and profes-sions less than 1% (Macnamara et al., 2014). Even in the most widely studied domains of expertiseresearch (music and chess), deliberate practice does not appear to adequately explain individualdifferences in performance (Hambrick et al., 2014).
A subsequent meta-analysis (Macnamara, Moreau, & Hambrick, 2016) focused on the perfor-mance of elite athletes to test the premise that individual differences in sports performance largelyreflect individual differences in accumulated amount of deliberate practice (Ericsson, 2007).Overall, deliberate practice accounted for 18% of the variance in sports performance. However, thecontribution differed depending on skill level. Most important, deliberate practice accounted foronly 1% of the variance in performance among elite-level performers.
Deliberate practice explained a similar amount of variance in performance for youth as it did foradult athletes (19% vs. 15%), and higher skill was independent of starting age (Macnamara et al.,2016). Taken together, the popular myth of the requirement for 10,000 hr to become expert is clearlynot supported by research evidence, suggesting that genetic influence and other factors mightaccount for the unexplained variance in performance (e.g., with athletes it might be ease ofaccumulating muscle mass or cortical motor control associated with superior coordination).
Certainly, deliberate practice is a necessary, but not sufficient, condition to explain individualdifferences in skills, and it appears that more variance is not explained by deliberate practice thanwhat is explained by it. From a practitioner perspective, these results suggest the importance ofconsidering other broad factors that may contribute to individual differences in competence andexpertise (e.g., cognitive ability, personality, peer support, and genetic predisposition). For example,across a wide range of piano-playing skill, deliberate practice accounted for less than half of thevariance (45.1%) in sight-reading performance (Meinz & Hambrick, 2011). However, working
Thi
sdo
cum
ent
isco
pyri
ghte
dby
the
Am
eric
anP
sych
olog
ical
Ass
ocia
tion
oron
eof
its
alli
edpu
blis
hers
.T
his
arti
cle
isin
tend
edso
lely
for
the
pers
onal
use
ofth
ein
divi
dual
user
and
isno
tto
bedi
ssem
inat
edbr
oadl
y.
163BEYOND GOAL SETTING TO GOAL FLOURISHING
memory capacity (which is highly stable and largely heritable) added incremental validity andexplained an additional 7.4% variance of performance above and beyond deliberate practice.
In addition, another study explored the popular 10,000 “rule” by examining associationsbetween musical ability and practice (rs � .18 –.36) in 10,500 Swedish twins (Mosing, Madison,Pedersen, Kuja-Halkola, & Ullén, 2014). Findings from this study suggest that practice does notalways make perfect if you do not have the minimal capabilities and the proper mindset to beginwith. Surprisingly, associations between music practice and music ability were predominantlygenetic, and, contrary to the researcher’s hypothesis, nonshared environmental influences did notcontribute. Genetic influences on hours of practice were substantial, explaining 69% of the variancein males and 41% in females, with additional shared-environmental influences in females (21%).Music abilities were moderately heritable, ranging between 12% and 61% (Ullén, Mosing, Holm,Eriksson, & Madison, 2014). Finally, using a sample of more than 850 twin pairs, Hambrick andTucker-Drob (2015) found, after controlling for music practice, that there was a statisticallysignificant genetic effect on music accomplishment.
Although it seems reasonable to predict that anyone who engages in thousands of hours ofdeliberate practice will develop a high level of skill in any field, it appears that our basic skills andabilities may actually limit the ultimate level of performance that can be attained. Genes andenvironment are both important for essentially any behavior, and practice is no exception. However,there is a strong indication that extreme environmentalist models of performance and expertise (e.g.,“practice is everything”) are likely to be just an urban myth (Nowack, 2015; Plomin, Shakeshaft,McMillan, & Trzaskowski, 2014).
Coaches and consultants should encourage clients to practice new skills until they becomecomfortable and automatic, but they should be cognizant of the limits of deliberate practice inrealistically converting “competent jerks” into “loveable stars” on the job. Evidence is convincingthat not all clients we work with can change very much despite deliberate and accumulated practice(Hambrick et al., 2014). In practical terms, the magnitude of behavior change expected and requiredby organizations that hire coaches to help employees change behavior may, at times, be bothunrealistic and unattainable for some.
Conclusion
In general, there has been a lack of attention in both research and practice to exploring ways tosuccessfully help clients initiate and sustain new behavior in training and coaching interventions(Bracken et al., 2016; Joo, 2005; London & Smither, 2002; Mashihi & Nowack, 2013). On the basisof the current neuroscience and behavioral research, coaches and consultants should consider thefollowing suggestions for optimizing goal setting and successful behavior change with their clients.
Skydiving Is Not Advised for Those Who Have a Tendency to Fail
Despite common edicts from psychologists, educators, and parents that perseverance and relentlesspursuit of goals optimize work and life success and well-being, recent research actually suggests acurvilinear pattern. In fact, some lifetime failure has been shown to be associated with optimalwell-being (Seery, 2011; Seery, Leo, Lupien, Kondrak, & Almonte, 2013). Popular concepts suchas grit (Duckworth et al., 2007) appear to reinforce a “never quit” philosophy despite evidence ofonly modest associations with diverse performance outcomes and conceptual overlap with consci-entiousness (Credé et al., 2016). In fact, failure in accomplishing goals should not be viewed as aweakness in clients, and terminating the pursuit of unrealistic or unattainable goals might actuallyprove to be a better strategy in terms of physical health and psychological well-being (Miller &Wrosch, 2007; Wrosch et al., 2013).
Practice Makes Better (Not Perfect)
More statistical variance in expertise and successful performance is not explained by deliberatepractice than is explained. Deliberate practice is merely a necessary, but not sufficient, condition for
Thi
sdo
cum
ent
isco
pyri
ghte
dby
the
Am
eric
anP
sych
olog
ical
Ass
ocia
tion
oron
eof
its
alli
edpu
blis
hers
.T
his
arti
cle
isin
tend
edso
lely
for
the
pers
onal
use
ofth
ein
divi
dual
user
and
isno
tto
bedi
ssem
inat
edbr
oadl
y.
164 NOWACK
skill competence and significant performance improvement, whether behavioral or mental (Pascual-Leone, Amedi, Fregni, & Merabet, 2005; Pascual-Leone et al. 1995). What needs to be carefullyconsidered is the investment of time, energy, and money compared to other factors such as readinessto change and physical, cognitive, and psychological abilities that might limit successful goalattainment and high performance (Macnamara et al., 2016). Even with the most motivated clients,meta-analytic research suggests only small to modest effect sizes for skills-based outcomes,implying that not all clients are capable of significant changes in behavior (Jones, Woods, &Guillaume, 2016).
Goal Intentions Are Not the Same As Practice Plans
Wanting to change, often observed as stating intentions through goals, does not necessarily ensurenor predict successful change. Motivated clients with a readiness to change will have the greatestsuccess translating stated goals into practice plans (Gollwitzer & Sheeran, 2006). Using if-thenintention methods for goal implementation with clients maximizes goal striving, completion, andsuccess. The “if” part of implementation intentions refers to the trigger or cue for implementingdesired behavior and can be existing habits, time, or specific situations such as meetings with others(Fogg, 2012). Coaches should enhance the use of regular practice plans with their clients to facilitatemaximum neuroplasticity through varied deliberate practice for approximately 60 to 90 days,depending on the complexity of the desired target behavior, resulting in unconscious competencerequired for higher levels of comfort, skill enhancement, and performance (Lally et al., 2010).
Goals Come in Different Sizes but, like Shoes, Should Fit the Client
If you go to any coffee shop, you can typically order a variety of different “sizes” of your favoritedrink. Goals also can be described as having different “sizes” and features, so being precise with thegoals of your client will maximize goal success. Fogg (2012) has summarized a behavioral grid of15 different goal options that help guide coaches and clients to focus on the best direction addressingtheir interest and needs (e.g., goals resulting in behaviors to do one time, sometime, or all of the timethat might include doing things more frequently, less frequently, differently, starting something new,or stopping an existing behavior). It is important that clients be specific in defining the type of goaland frequency of adoption they desire in order to ensure the possibility of goal striving andsuccessful achievement.
Adopt Strategies to Optimize Goal Success but Avoid Backup Planning
Motivation and commitment to goals are indeed prerequisites for client success in attempting todevelop new habits and adhere to goals. Kruglanski, Pierro, and Sheveland (2011) found thatthinking about additional strategies for achieving a given goal indeed increases commitment to thatgoal. However, it is easy to confuse our clients by encouraging them to create strategies toaccomplish stated goals instead of urging them to contemplate and develop backup plans in thepossible face of failure.
Backup plans, or secondary goals, should not be confused with relapse-prevention strategiesused effectively for abstinence-oriented goals related to addiction (Marlatt & Gordon, 1980).Relapse prevention classifies factors contributing to relapse into two categories: proximal determi-nants (high-stress situations, coping skills, outcome expectancies) and covert antecedents (e.g.,urges/cravings, social interactions increasing relapse). Using a cognitive– behavioral framework,relapse prevention helps the client recognize and prepare for high-stress situations in which a lapseor total relapse is likely (Larimer, Palmer, & Marlatt, 1999).
Although making a backup plan may provide practical and emotional benefits in the face ofuncertainty, the value may come at a higher cost than previously understood. Results from threestudies suggest that the act of reflecting on a backup plan has harmful effects on goal accomplish-ment (Shin & Milkman, 2016). This research suggests that reflecting on or generating backup plansmay actually reduce the probability of successful goal attainment by dampening the initial goaldesire (note that goal success that is based on pure luck or innate skill will not be affected). Clients
Thi
sdo
cum
ent
isco
pyri
ghte
dby
the
Am
eric
anP
sych
olog
ical
Ass
ocia
tion
oron
eof
its
alli
edpu
blis
hers
.T
his
arti
cle
isin
tend
edso
lely
for
the
pers
onal
use
ofth
ein
divi
dual
user
and
isno
tto
bedi
ssem
inat
edbr
oadl
y.
165BEYOND GOAL SETTING TO GOAL FLOURISHING
who are mindful of their goal(s) and stated target behavior(s) will be optimally successful, butchallenging clients to come up with alternative or backup plans might actually interfere withsubsequent goal success.
Insight and Motivation Are Only Necessary, but Not Sufficient, Conditions forSuccessful Goal Attainment and Performance Improvement
Not all clients who are self-aware and motivated will successfully change behavior or become moreeffective on the job (Bacon & Spear, 2003; Chiaburu & Marinova, 2005; Glasgow et al., 2014;Mashihi & Nowack, 2013). In a recent comprehensive review of coaching studies (Grover &Furnham, 2016), nearly all studies investigating the impact of coaching on goal attainment werefound to have positive overall results as well as a significant association with enhancing self-efficacyin clients. However, very few positive associations appear to support a relationship betweencoaching and actual improvement in job performance (Grover & Furnham, 2016).
From both a research and practice perspective, it is important to distinguish between proximaloutcomes (e.g., enhanced resilience, self-awareness, skills acquisition) and distal outcomes (e.g.,retention, performance) and to identify which ones are realistic and possible with specific behavior-change interventions such as coaching. Finally, based on 360-degree-feedback studies with coach-ing, effect sizes for observed behavior change are typically modest, suggesting that organizationsneed to be realistic about the magnitude of behavior change to expect even when clients are highlymotivated (Nowack & Mashihi, 2012; Smither et al., 2005).
References
Achtziger, A., Gollwitzer, P. M., & Sheeran, P. (2008). Implementation intentions and shielding goal strivingfrom unwanted thoughts and feelings. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, 381–393. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0146167207311201
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behaviour. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50,179 –211. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
Amabile, T., & Kramer, S. (2011). The power of small wins. Harvard Business Review, 89, 70 –80.Atwater, L. E., & Brett, J. F. (2005). Antecedents and consequences of reactions to developmental 360°
feedback. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 66, 532–548. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2004.05.003Bacon, T. R., & Spear, K. I. (2003). Adaptive coaching: The art and practice of a client-centered approach to
performance improvement. Palo Alto, CA: Davis-Black.Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84,
191–215. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191Becker, M. H. (1974). The Health Belief Model and sick role behaviour. Health Education Monographs, 2,
409 –473. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/109019817400200407Beilock, S. L., Carr, T. H., MacMahon, C., & Starkes, J. L. (2002). When paying attention becomes counter-
productive: Impact of divided versus skill-focused attention on novice and experienced performance ofsensorimotor skills. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 8, 6 –16. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1076-898X.8.1.6
Bengtsson, S. L., Nagy, Z., Skare, S., Forsman, L., Forssberg, H., & Ullén, F. (2005). Extensive piano practicinghas regionally specific effects on white matter development. Nature Neuroscience, 8, 1148 –1150. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nn1516
Bonezzi, A., Brendl, C. M., & De Angelis, M. (2011). Stuck in the middle: The psychophysics of goal pursuit.Psychological Science, 22, 607–612. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0956797611404899
Boyatzis, R. E., & Akrivou, K. (2006). The ideal self as a driver of intentional change. Journal of ManagementDevelopment, 25, 624 –642. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02621710610678454
Bracken, D. W., Rose, D. S., & Church, A. H. (2016). The evolution and devolution of 360° feedback. Industrialand Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 9, 761–794.
Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (1982). Control theory: A useful conceptual framework for personality–social,clinical, and health psychology. Psychological Bulletin, 92, 111–135. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.92.1.111
Chiaburu, D. S., & Marinova, S. V. (2005). What predicts skill transfer? An exploratory study of goalorientation, training self-efficacy and organizational supports. International Journal of Training and Devel-opment, 9, 110 –123. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2419.2005.00225.x
Thi
sdo
cum
ent
isco
pyri
ghte
dby
the
Am
eric
anP
sych
olog
ical
Ass
ocia
tion
oron
eof
its
alli
edpu
blis
hers
.T
his
arti
cle
isin
tend
edso
lely
for
the
pers
onal
use
ofth
ein
divi
dual
user
and
isno
tto
bedi
ssem
inat
edbr
oadl
y.
166 NOWACK
Chiaburu, D. S., Van Dam, K., & Hutchins, H. M. (2010). Social support in the workplace and training transfer:A longitudinal analysis. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 18, 187–200. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2389.2010.00500.x
Cole-Lewis, H., & Kershaw, T. (2010). Text messaging as a tool for behavior change in disease prevention andmanagement. Epidemiologic Reviews, 32, 56 –69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/epirev/mxq004
Collins, J. (1999). Turning goals into results: The power of catalytic mechanisms. Harvard Business Review, 77,70 –82, 184.
Colvin, G. (2008). Talent is overrated. What really separates world-class performers from everybody else. NewYork, NY: Penguin.
Conner, M., & Higgins, A. R. (2010). Long-term effects of implementation intentions on prevention of smokinguptake among adolescents: A cluster randomized controlled trial. Health Psychology, 29, 529 –538. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0020317
Credé, M., Tynan, M. C., & Harms, P. D. (2016). Much ado about grit: A meta-analytic synthesis of the gritliterature. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 113, 492–511. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000102
Dalton, A. N., & Spiller, S. A. (2012). Too much of a good thing: The benefits of implementation intentionsdepend on the number of goals. Journal of Consumer Research, 39, 600 –614. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/664500
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York,NY: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-2271-7
De Leon, E., Fuentes, L. W., & Cohen, J. E. (2014). Characterizing periodic messaging interventions acrosshealth behaviors and media: Systematic review. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 16, e93. http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/jmir.2837
DeShon, R. P., & Gillespie, J. Z. (2005). A. motivated action theory account of goal orientation. Journal ofApplied Psychology, 90, 1096 –1127.
Dickerson, S. S., & Kemeny, M. E. (2004). Acute stressors and cortisol responses: A theoretical integration andsynthesis of laboratory research. Psychological Bulletin, 130, 355–391. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.130.3.355
Draganski, B., Gaser, C., Busch, V., Schuierer, G., Bogdahn, U., & May, A. (2004). Neuroplasticity: Changesin grey matter induced by training. Nature, 427, 311–312. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/427311a
Duckworth, A. L., Peterson, C., Matthews, M. D., & Kelly, D. R. (2007). Grit: Perseverance and passion forlong-term goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 1087–1101. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.92.6.1087
Elliott, E. S., & Dweck, C. S. (1988). Goals: An approach to motivation and achievement. Journal of Personalityand Social Psychology, 54, 5–12.
Ericsson, K. A. (1996a). The influence of experience and deliberate practice on the development of superiorexpert performance. In K. A. Ericsson, N. Charness, P. J. Feltovich, & R. R. Hoffman (Eds.), The Cambridgehandbook of expertise and expert performance (pp. 683–703). New York, NY: Cambridge University.
Ericsson, K. A. (Ed.). (1996b). The road to excellence: The acquisition of expert performance in the arts andsciences, sports and games. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Ericsson, K. A. (2007). Deliberate practice and the modifiability of body and mind: Toward a science of thestructure and acquisition of expert and elite performance. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 38,4 –34.
Ericsson, K. A., Krampe, R. T., & Tesch-Römer, C. (1993). The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition ofexpert performance. Psychological Review, 100, 363–406. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.100.3.363
Fanning, J., Mullen, S. P., & McAuley, E. (2012). Increasing physical activity with mobile devices: Ameta-analysis. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 14, e161. http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/jmir.2171
Fogg, B. J. (2012, July 12). Fogg Behavior Grid [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://www.behaviorgrid.org/Fogg, B. J. (n.d.). BJ Fogg’s behavior model [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://www.behaviormodel.org/
index.htmlGallo, I. S., Cohen, A., Gollwitzer, P. M., & Oettingen, G. (2013). Neurophysiological correlates of the
self-regulation of goal pursuit. In P. A. Hall (Ed.), Social neuroscience and public health (pp. 19 –33). NewYork, NY: Springer.
Gladwell, M. (2008). Outliers: The story of success. New York, NY: Little, Brown, and Co.Glasgow, R. E., Fisher, L., Strycker, L. A., Hessler, D., Toobert, D. J., King, D. K., & Jacobs, T. (2014). Minimal
intervention needed for change: Definition, use, and value for improving health and health research.Translational Behavioral Medicine, 4, 26 –33. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13142-013-0232-1
Gollwitzer, P. M., & Sheeran, P. (2006). Implementation intentions and goal achievement: A meta-analysis of
Thi
sdo
cum
ent
isco
pyri
ghte
dby
the
Am
eric
anP
sych
olog
ical
Ass
ocia
tion
oron
eof
its
alli
edpu
blis
hers
.T
his
arti
cle
isin
tend
edso
lely
for
the
pers
onal
use
ofth
ein
divi
dual
user
and
isno
tto
bedi
ssem
inat
edbr
oadl
y.
167BEYOND GOAL SETTING TO GOAL FLOURISHING
effects and processes. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 69 –119. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(06)38002-1
Gollwitzer, P. M., & Sheeran, P. (2009). Self-regulation of consumer decision making and behavior: The roleof implementation intentions. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 19, 593–607. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2009.08.004
Gregory, J. B., Levy, P. E., & Jeffers, M. (2008). Development of a model of the feedback process withinexecutive coaching. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 60, 42–56. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1065-9293.60.1.42
Grover, S., & Furnham, A. (2016). Coaching as a developmental intervention in organisations: A systematicreview of its effectiveness and the mechanisms underlying it. PLoS ONE, 11, e0159137. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0159137
Hambrick, D. Z., Oswald, F. L., Altmann, E. M., Meinz, E. J., Gobet, F., & Campitelli, G. (2014). Deliberatepractice: Is that all it takes to become an expert? Intelligence, 45, 34 –45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2013.04.001
Hambrick, D. Z., & Tucker-Drob, E. M. (2015). The genetics of music accomplishment: Evidence forgene-environment correlation and interaction. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 22, 112–120. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/s13423-014-0671-9
Hampson, S. E., & Friedman, H. S. (2008). Personality and health: A lifespan perspective. In O. P. John, R.Robins, & L. Pervin (Eds.), The handbook of personality (3rd ed., pp. 770 –794). New York, NY: GuilfordPress.
Harkin, B., Webb, T. L., Chang, B. P. I., Prestwich, A., Conner, M., Kellar, I., . . . Sheeran, P. (2016). Doesmonitoring goal progress promote goal attainment? A meta-analysis of the experimental evidence. Psycho-logical Bulletin, 142, 198 –229. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/bul0000025
Holmes, A. J., Hollinshead, M. O., Roffman, J. L., Smoller, J. W., & Buckner, R. L. (2016). Individualdifferences in cognitive control circuit anatomy link sensation seeking, impulsivity, and substance use. TheJournal of Neuroscience, 36, 4038 –4049. http://dx.doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3206-15.2016
Hyman, D. J., Pavlik, V. N., Taylor, W. C., Goodrick, G. K., & Moye, L. (2007). Simultaneous vs sequentialcounseling for multiple behavior change. Archives of Internal Medicine, 167, 1152–1158. http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/archinte.167.11.1152
Jones, R. J., Woods, S. A., & Guillaume, Y. R. F. (2016). The effectiveness of workplace coaching: Ameta-analysis of learning and performance outcomes from coaching. Journal of Occupational and Organi-zational Psychology, 89, 249 –277. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/joop.12119
Joo, B. K. (2005). Executive coaching: A conceptual framework from an integrative review of research andpractice. Human Resource Development Review, 4, 462–488. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1534484305280866
Kern, M. L., & Friedman, H. S. (2008). Do conscientious individuals live longer? A quantitative review. HealthPsychology, 27, 505–512. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0278-6133.27.5.505
King, L., & Hicks, J. (2006). Narrating the self in the past and the future: Implications for maturity. Researchin Human Development, 3, 121–138. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15427609.2006.9683365
Kleim, J. A., & Jones, T. A. (2008). Principles of experience-dependent neural plasticity: Implications forrehabilitation after brain damage. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 51, S225–S239.http://dx.doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2008/018)
Koestner, R., Lekes, N., Powers, T. A., & Chicoine, E. (2002). Attaining personal goals: Self-concordance plusimplementation intentions equals success. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 231–244.http://dx.doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.83.1.231
Koo, M., & Fishbach, A. (2010). Climbing the goal ladder: How upcoming actions increase level of aspiration.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99, 1–13.
Koroleva, N. (2016). A new model of sustainable change in executive coaching: Coaches’ attitudes, requiredresources and routinisation. International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching and Mentoring, 10, 84 –97.
Kruglanski, A. W., Pierro, A., & Sheveland, A. (2011). How many roads lead to Rome? Equifinality set-size andcommitment to goals and means. European Journal of Social Psychology, 41, 344 –352. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.780
Kruglanski, A. W., Shah, J. Y., Fishbach, A., Friedman, R., Chun, W. Y., & Sleeth-Keppler, D. (2002). A theoryof goal systems. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 34, pp. 331–378).San Diego, CA: Academic Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(02)80008-9
Lally, P., Van Jaarsveld, C., Potts, H., & Wardle, J. (2010). How are habits formed: Modeling habit formationin the real world. European Journal of Social Psychology, 1009, 998 –1009.
Larimer, M. E., Palmer, R. S., & Marlatt, G. A. (1999). Relapse prevention. An overview of Marlatt’scognitive-behavioral model. Alcohol Research & Health, 23, 151–160.
Thi
sdo
cum
ent
isco
pyri
ghte
dby
the
Am
eric
anP
sych
olog
ical
Ass
ocia
tion
oron
eof
its
alli
edpu
blis
hers
.T
his
arti
cle
isin
tend
edso
lely
for
the
pers
onal
use
ofth
ein
divi
dual
user
and
isno
tto
bedi
ssem
inat
edbr
oadl
y.
168 NOWACK
Latham, G. P. (2003). Goal setting: A five-step approach to behavior change. Organizational Dynamics, 32,309 –318.
Latham, G. P., & Locke, E. A. (2006). Enhancing the benefits and overcoming the pitfalls of goal setting.Organizational Dynamics, 35, 332–340.
Latham, G. P., & Locke, E. A. (2013). Potential pitfalls in goal setting and how to avoid them. In G. P. Latham& E. A. Locke (Eds.), New developments in goal setting and task performance (pp. 569 –579). New York,NY: Routledge.
Lawton, R., Conner, M., & McEachan, R. (2009). Desire or reason: Predicting health behaviors from affectiveand cognitive attitudes. Health Psychology, 28, 56 –65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0013424
Lin, C., Chiang, M., Knowlton, B., Iacoboni, M., Udompholkul, P., & Wu, A. (2013). Interleaved practiceenhances skill learning and the functional connectivity of fronto-parietal networks. Human Brain Mapping,34, 1542–1558.
Linde, J. A., Jeffery, R. W., Finch, E. A., Ng, D. M., & Rothman, A. J. (2004). Are unrealistic weight loss goalsassociated with outcomes for overweight women? Obesity Research, 12, 569 –576.
Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (2002). Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation.A 35-year odyssey. American Psychologist, 57, 705–717. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.57.9.705
London, M., & Smither, J. W. (2002). Feedback orientation, feedback culture and the longitudinal performancemanagement process. Human Resource Management Review, 12, 81–100. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1053-4822(01)00043-2
Lyubomirsky, S., King, L. A., & Diener, E. (2005). The benefits of frequent positive affect: Does happiness leadto success? Psychological Bulletin, 131, 803–855.
Macnamara, B. N., Hambrick, D. Z., & Oswald, F. L. (2014). Deliberate practice and performance in music,games, sports, education, and professions: A meta-analysis. Psychological Science, 25, 1608 –1618. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0956797614535810
Macnamara, B. N., Moreau, D., & Hambrick, D. Z. (2016). The relationship between deliberate practice andperformance in sports: A meta-analysis. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 11, 333–350. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1745691616635591
Mann, T., de Ridder, D., & Fujita, K. (2013). Self-regulation of health behavior: Social psychological approachesto goal setting and goal striving. Health Psychology, 32, 487–498. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0028533
Marlatt, G. A., & Gordon, J. R. (1980). Determinants of relapse: Implications for the maintenance of behaviorchange. In P. O. Davidson & S. M. Davidson (Eds.), Behavioral medicine: Changing health lifestyles (pp.410 –452). New York, NY: Brunner/Mazel.
Martin, H. J. (2010). Workplace climate and peer support as determinants of training transfer. Human ResourceDevelopment Quarterly, 21, 87–104. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.20038
Mashihi, S., & Nowack, K. (2013). Clueless: Coaching people who just don’t get it. Santa Monica, CA: EnvisiaLearning.
Matthews, G. (2012). Goals research summary. Retrieved from http://www.dominican.edu/academics/ahss/undergraduate-programs/psych/faculty/assets-gail-matthews/researchsummary2.pdf
Meinz, E. J., & Hambrick, D. Z. (2011). Deliberate practice is necessary but not sufficient to explain individualdifferences in piano sight-reading skill: The role of working memory capacity. Psychological Science, 20,280 –285.
Miller, G. E., Chen, E., & Zhou, E. S. (2007). If it goes up, must it come down? Chronic stress and thehypothalamic-pituitary-adrenocortical axis in humans. Psychological Bulletin, 133, 25–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.133.1.25
Miller, G. E., & Wrosch, C. (2007). You’ve gotta know when to fold ’em: Goal disengagement and systemicinflammation in adolescence. Psychological Science, 18, 773–777. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01977.x
Mohr, D. C., Lovera, J., Brown, T., Cohen, B., Neylan, T., Henry, R., . . . Pelletier, D. (2012). A randomizedtrial of stress management for the prevention of new brain lesions in MS. Neurology, 79, 412–419.http://dx.doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0b013e3182616ff9
Mosing, M. A., Madison, G., Pedersen, N. L., Kuja-Halkola, R., & Ullén, F. (2014). Practice does not makeperfect: No causal effect of music practice on music ability. Psychological Science, 25, 1795–1803.http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0956797614541990
Neal, D. T., Wood, W., & Quinn, J. M. (2006). Habits—A repeat performance. Current Directions inPsychological Science, 15, 198 –202. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8721.2006.00435.x
Nowack, K. (2009). Leveraging multirater feedback to facilitate successful behavioral change. ConsultingPsychology Journal: Practice and Research, 61, 280 –297. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0017381
Nowack, K. (2015). Urban talent myths exposed. Talent Management Magazine, 11, 35–37, 47.
Thi
sdo
cum
ent
isco
pyri
ghte
dby
the
Am
eric
anP
sych
olog
ical
Ass
ocia
tion
oron
eof
its
alli
edpu
blis
hers
.T
his
arti
cle
isin
tend
edso
lely
for
the
pers
onal
use
ofth
ein
divi
dual
user
and
isno
tto
bedi
ssem
inat
edbr
oadl
y.
169BEYOND GOAL SETTING TO GOAL FLOURISHING
Nowack, K., & Mashihi, S. (2012). Evidence based answers to 15 questions about leveraging 360-degreefeedback. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 64, 157–182. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0030011
Oettingen, G., & Gollwitzer, P. M. (2007). Goal setting and goal striving. In A. Tesser & N. Schwartz (Vol.Eds.), M. Hewstone & M. Brewer (Series Eds.), Intraindividual processes: Vol. 1. Blackwell handbook insocial psychology (pp. 329 –347). Oxford, United Kingdom: Blackwell. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9780470998519.ch15
Oettingen, G., Marquardt, M. K., & Gollwitzer, P. M. (2012). Mental contrasting turns positive feedback oncreative potential into successful performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 990 –996.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2012.03.008
Oettingen, G., Mayer, D., Timur Sevincer, A., Stephens, E. J., Pak, H. J., & Hagenah, M. (2009). Mentalcontrasting and goal commitment: The mediating role of energization. Personality and Social PsychologyBulletin, 35, 608 –622. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0146167208330856
Orehek, E., & Forest, A. L. (2016). When people serve as means to goals: Implications of a motivational accountof close relationships. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 25, 79 –84. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0963721415623536
Pascual-Leone, A., Amedi, A., Fregni, F., & Merabet, L. B. (2005). The plastic human brain cortex. AnnualReview of Neuroscience, 28, 377–401. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.neuro.27.070203.144216
Pascual-Leone, A., Nguyet, D., Cohen, L. G., Brasil-Neto, J. P., Cammarota, A., & Hallett, M. (1995).Modulation of muscle responses evoked by transcranial magnetic stimulation during the acquisition of newfine motor skills. Journal of Neurophysiology, 74, 1037–1045.
Passmore, J. (2007). Addressing deficit performance through coaching—Using motivational interviewing forperformance improvement at work. International Coaching Psychology Review, 2, 265–276.
Plomin, R., Shakeshaft, N. G., McMillan, A., & Trzaskowski, M. (2014). Nature, nurture, and expertise.Intelligence, 45, 46 –59. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2013.06.008
Prochaska, J. O., & Velicer, W. F. (1997). The transtheoretical model of health behavior change. AmericanJournal of Health Promotion, 12, 38 –48. http://dx.doi.org/10.4278/0890-1171-12.1.38
Rhodes, R. E., Plotnikoff, R. C., & Courneya, K. S. (2008). Predicting the physical activity intention-behaviorprofiles of adopters and maintainers using three social cognition models. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 36,244 –252. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12160-008-9071-6
Riediger, M., & Freund, A. M. (2004). Interference and facilitation among personal goals: Differentialassociations with subjective well-being and persistent goal pursuit. Personality and Social PsychologyBulletin, 30, 1511–1523. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0146167204271184
Rohrer, D. (2012). Interleaving helps students distinguish among similar concepts. Educational PsychologyReview, 24, 355–367. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10648-012-9201-3
Rohrer, D., Hedrick, R. F., & Steershick, S. (2015). Interleaved practice improves mathematics learning. Journalof Educational Psychology, 107, 900 –908. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/edu0000001
Rosser, J. C., Jr., Lynch, P. J., Cuddihy, L., Gentile, D. A., Klonsky, J., & Merrell, R. (2007). The impact ofvideo games on training surgeons in the 21st century. Archives of Surgery, 142, 181–186. http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/archsurg.142.2.181
Schmidt, A. M., & DeShon, R. P. (2007). What to do? The effects of discrepancies, incentives, and time ondynamic goal prioritization. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 928 –941. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.4.928
Schunk, D. H. (2001). Social cognitive theory and self-regulated learning. In B. J. Zimmerman & D. H Schunk(Eds.), Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: Theoretical perspectives (2nd ed., pp. 125–151).Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Scott, M. L., & Nowlis, S. M. (2013). The effect of goal specificity on consumer goal reengagement. Journalof Consumer Research, 40, 444 –459. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/670766
Seery, M. (2011). Resilience: A silver lining to experiencing adverse life events? Current Directions inPsychological Science, 20, 390 –394.
Seery, M. D., Leo, R. J., Lupien, S. P., Kondrak, C. L., & Almonte, J. L. (2013). An upside to adversity?Moderate cumulative lifetime adversity is associated with resilient responses in the face of controlledstressors. Psychological Science, 24, 1181–1189. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0956797612469210
Seijts, G. H., Latham, G. P., Tasa, K., & Latham, B. W. (2004). Goal setting and goal orientation: An integrationof two different yet related literatures. Academy of Management Journal, 47, 227–239.
Shin, J., & Milkman, K. L. (2016). How backup plans can harm goal pursuit: The unexpected downside of beingprepared for failure. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Making, 135, 1–9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2016.04.003
Thi
sdo
cum
ent
isco
pyri
ghte
dby
the
Am
eric
anP
sych
olog
ical
Ass
ocia
tion
oron
eof
its
alli
edpu
blis
hers
.T
his
arti
cle
isin
tend
edso
lely
for
the
pers
onal
use
ofth
ein
divi
dual
user
and
isno
tto
bedi
ssem
inat
edbr
oadl
y.
170 NOWACK
Smither, J., London, M., & Reilly, R. (2005). Does performance improve following multisource feedback? Atheoretical model, meta-analysis, and review of empirical findings. Personnel Psychology, 58, 33–66.http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2005.514_1.x
Sonesh, C., Coultas, C. W., Marlow, S. L., Lacerenza, C. N., Reyes, D., & Salas, E. (2015). Coaching in the wild:Identifying factors that lead to success. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 67,189 –217. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/cpb0000042
Tang, Y.-Y., Hölzel, B. K., & Posner, M. I. (2015). The neuroscience of mindfulness meditation. Nature ReviewsNeuroscience, 16, 213–225. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nrn3916
Touré-Tillery, M., & Fishbach, A. (2011). The course of motivation. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 21,414 –423. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2011.04.004
Touré-Tillery, M., & Fishbach, A. (2012). The end justifies the means, but only in the middle. Journal ofExperimental Psychology: General, 141, 570 –583. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0025928
Ullén, F., Mosing, M. A., Holm, L., Eriksson, H., & Madison, G. (2014). Psychometric properties andheritability of a new online test for musicality, the Swedish Musical Discrimination Test. Personality andIndividual Differences, 63, 87–93. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.01.057
Verhoeven, A. A. C., Marieke, A., Adriaanse, M. A., De Rider, D. T. D., De Vet, E., & Fenniss, B. M. (2013).Less is more: The effect of multiple implementation intentions targeting unhealthy snacking habits.European Journal of Social Psychology, 43, 344 –354. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.1963
Webb, T. L., Joseph, J., Yardley, L., & Michie, S. (2010). Using the internet to promote health behavior change:A systematic review and meta-analysis of the impact of theoretical basis, use of behavior change techniques,and mode of delivery on efficacy. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 12, e4. http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/jmir.1376
Woo, S., Sims, C., Rupp, D., & Gibbons, A. (2008). Development engagement within and following develop-mental assessment centers: Considering feedback favorability and self-assessor agreement. Personnel Psy-chology, 61, 727–759. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2008.00129.x
Wood, W., Quinn, J. M., & Kashy, D. A. (2002). Habits in everyday life: Thought, emotion, and action. Journalof Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 1281–1297. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.83.6.1281
Wood, W., & Rünger, D. (2016). Psychology of habit. Annual Review of Psychology, 67, 289 –314. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-122414-033417
Wood, W., Tam, L., & Guerrero, M. (2005). Changing circumstances, disrupting habits. Journal of Personalityand Social Psychology, 88, 918 –933. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.88.6.918
Woollett, K., Spiers, H. J., & Maguire, E. A. (2009). Talent in the taxi: A model system for exploring expertise.Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series B: Biological Sciences, 364, 1407–1416.http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2008.0288
Wrosch, C., Miller, G. E., Scheier, M. F., & Brun de Pontet, S. B. (2007). Giving up on unattainable goals:Benefits for health? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 251–265. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0146167206294905
Wrosch, C., Scheier, M. F., Carver, C. S., & Schulz, R. (2003). The importance of goal disengagement inadaptive self-regulation: When giving up is beneficial. Self and Identity, 2, 1–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15298860309021
Wrosch, C., Scheier, M. F., & Miller, G. E. (2013). Goal adjustment capacities, subjective well-being, andphysical health. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 7, 847–860. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12074
Zu Knyphausen-Aufsess, D., Smukalla, M., & Abt, M. (2009). Towards a new training transfer portfolio: Areview of training-related studies in the last decade. Zeitschrift für Personalforschung, 23, 288 –311.
Received October 27, 2016Latest revision received February 2, 2017
Accepted February 5, 2017 �
Thi
sdo
cum
ent
isco
pyri
ghte
dby
the
Am
eric
anP
sych
olog
ical
Ass
ocia
tion
oron
eof
its
alli
edpu
blis
hers
.T
his
arti
cle
isin
tend
edso
lely
for
the
pers
onal
use
ofth
ein
divi
dual
user
and
isno
tto
bedi
ssem
inat
edbr
oadl
y.
171BEYOND GOAL SETTING TO GOAL FLOURISHING
- FACILITATING SUCCESSFUL BEHAVIOR CHANGE: BEYOND GOAL SETTING TO GOAL FLOURISHING
- What Are the Key Characteristics of Goals?
- Easy Goals Versus Challenging/Stretch Goals
- Short-Term Focus Versus Long-Term Focus
- Single Goals Versus Multiple Goals
- Learning Goals Versus Performance Goals
- Avoidance Goals Versus Approach Goals
- If Goal Intentions Are Not Generally Effective to Facilitate Behavior Change, What Works Better?
- Goal Striving: When Are Clients Most Motivated?
- How Long Does It Take for New Habits to Form?
- When Should Clients “Hold” and When Should They “Fold” in Goal Striv …
- Does Practice Make Perfect?
- Conclusion
- Skydiving Is Not Advised for Those Who Have a Tendency to Fail
- Practice Makes Better (Not Perfect)
- Goal Intentions Are Not the Same As Practice Plans
- Goals Come in Different Sizes but, like Shoes, Should Fit the Client
- Adopt Strategies to Optimize Goal Success but Avoid Backup Planning
- Insight and Motivation Are Only Necessary, but Not Sufficient, Conditions for Successful Goal At …
- References
Posted in 
