Goal Ambiguity in U.S. Federal Agencies

288 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Understanding Affective Organizational Commitment (2011, background): “Much of the goal ambiguity literature suggests clear organizational goals enhance individual and organizational performance by defining organizational expectations for employees (Chun & Rainey, 2005; Locke & Latham, 2002; Pandey & Rainey, 2006; Wright, 2004).”
Finding Workable Levers Over Work Motivation (2007, unknown): “One frequently cited characteristic of the public sector is the potential for ambiguity or outright conflict between competing goals (Chun & Rainey, 2005; Pandey & Rainey, 2006; Rainey, 1993; Rainey et al., 1976).”
Performance Management, High-Powered Incentives, and Environmental Policies in China (2015, background): “Another implication of our research for results-based management is that a proliferation of important goals may negatively affect organizational performance (Chun and Rainey 2005).”
Public Service Motivation Measurement (2007, background): “…measurement are beginning to add significant new insights on key public management themes such as red tape (Bozeman, 2000; Bozeman & Scott, 1996; Coursey & Pandey, in press; Pandey & Scott, 2002; Pandey & Welch, 2005) and goal ambiguity (Chun & Rainey, 2003; Pandey & Rainey, 2006; Rainey, 1983).”