Content area
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to compare two approaches to non-financial performance enhancement in a field setting. Specifically, the Premack Principle and the goal setting technique were each introduced as interventions during the four week study.
It was hypothesized that no difference would exist between the baseline, Premack and goal setting scores obtained on the attitudinal measures. The study utilized measures of satisfaction, commitment, intrinsic job motivation, and perceived performance so as to facilitate comparison between Premack and goal setting. A Pacific Northwest regional university Grounds Department served as the setting for the study. Conducted over a four week period, with one week each devoted to baseline, Premack, goal setting and no-intervention, the study utilized 32 subjects who each performed similar tasks. Subjects completed the various questionnaires at the conclusion of each week's intervention. Overall findings support the acceptance of the null hypotheses. For two measures, satisfaction and commitment, Premack results were similar to those associated with goal setting. Although a certain degree of support is evident, the other two measures (intrinsic job motivation and perceived performance) were somewhat inconclusive. Nevertheless, for the purposes of this study, the Premack results seem to have held their own with the results associated with the more widely-researched goal setting technique.
The study serves to provide support for Premack research in a work setting. In addition, the study provides for some much needed comparison of two non-financial performance enhancement techniques. Finally, the study utilizes other measures than those habitually associated with goal setting and Premack research.
