Hi All,
I would like to share an article on Procrastination with you all. Procrastination has been recognized as one of the major time stealers, so I thought to share an article on the same with you all. Please do share your feedback on it.
Regards,
Meenakshi
From India, Pune
4I would like to share an article on Procrastination with you all. Procrastination has been recognized as one of the major time stealers, so I thought to share an article on the same with you all. Please do share your feedback on it.
Regards,
Meenakshi
From India, Pune
Hi Meenakshi, A real good article on Procrastination !!! Hope this articles open the eyes of many like me and understand the importance of Time... What say? Regards HiralD
From India, Mumbai
From India, Mumbai
Hi,
Thank you for the appreciation. Actually, I am working on a Time Management module. While surfing the internet for the material, I came across this article. I customized it to use in my training sessions. It opened my eyes, and I am happy that you feel the same.
Regards, Meenakshi
From India, Pune
Thank you for the appreciation. Actually, I am working on a Time Management module. While surfing the internet for the material, I came across this article. I customized it to use in my training sessions. It opened my eyes, and I am happy that you feel the same.
Regards, Meenakshi
From India, Pune
Article - PROCRASTINATION: SELF-REGULATION IN INITIATING AVERSIVE GOALS
THE RELEVANCE OF STUDYING PROCRASTINATION
Although procrastination is a widespread and easily recognized phenomenon that affects many at work, it is a neglected topic in work motivation. An increased understanding of the antecedents, motivational dynamics, and effects of procrastination will help identify the appropriate strategies to overcome the dysfunctional aspects of the behavior.
The theoretical relevance of procrastination lies in two neglected topics in work motivation, avoidance, and impulsiveness.
Avoidance
Most work motivation theories describe how motivation increases performance and enhances satisfaction, and how individuals actively try to achieve positive outcomes. Rarely is the focus on why people do not do things or how they avoid outcomes. Procrastination can be considered as an illustration of how people are motivated not to do things (see also Van Eerde & Briner, 1999) and how people sometimes avoid, rather than approach, outcomes. Approach and avoidance cannot be considered exact opposites (Higgins, 1997) or as consisting of interchangeable units (Locke, 1975). Rather, approach and avoidance are different dimensions, where avoidance is a reaction to threat, or generally "to avoid pain," and approach is a reaction to an incentive, "to attain pleasure." These two dimensions are the basis of hedonism. Modern work motivation theories have moved away from the hedonism base and have treated motivation as a predominantly cognitive process. However, it is still assumed that people strive to attain goals, values, or purposes, which are underpinned by human needs to avoid pain or to attain pleasure. The focus in acting is on a goal (Locke, 1975), and the goal is affected by notions of avoiding pain or attaining pleasure.
Recent research on action tendencies towards an attitude object suggests that reaction times to positive and negative words imply the avoidance of negative outcomes without conscious awareness (Chen & Bargh, 1999). Chen and Bargh (1999) suggested that an immediate, automatic response to threat may serve the purpose of preparing an individual for appropriate action even when attention is focused on conscious goal-directed activity or when attention is restricted in some way, for example, when a person is tired. Procrastination may be seen as task avoidance in the same sense.
Impulsiveness
Impulsiveness, or the opposite of the delay of gratification, has been studied extensively in children (Mischel, 1996) but has not been a topic of research in work motivation. However, impulsiveness may play a role when individuals are faced with multiple goals and need to decide what to do now and what to do later, as is often the case in any job that allows for some discretion in work scheduling. In other words, intertemporal choices need to be made. Intertemporal choice can lead to increased planning and greater analytical effort but can also be influenced by impulsiveness, a well-documented phenomenon in animals and humans in performing actions over time (Ainslie, 1975; Loewenstein & Elster, 1992). Impulsiveness is the preference for short-term outcomes over future rewards, even though these may be more valuable in an objective sense. This preference for immediate rewards, also called the inability to delay gratification (Mischel, 1996), is sometimes dominant to the extent that it may be called self-defeating. In procrastination, the long-term reward will follow the execution of an unattractive action. The impulsiveness shows itself when a person chooses a less important but more pleasant activity instead.
DEFINING PROCRASTINATION
Procrastination has typically been defined as a trait or behavioral disposition to postpone or delay performing a task or making decisions (Milgram, Mey-Tal, & Levison, 1998). This focus on dispositions has important shortcomings because intraindividual processes that may explain the differences between individuals remain uninvestigated. However, the dispositional approach may be reconciled with the idea that procrastination can also be described as a process. As such, procrastination involves the avoidance of the implementation of an intention. The avoidance is characterized by distraction with more pleasant activities or thoughts. The intention concerns a behavior that is experienced as emotionally unattractive but cognitively important because it will lead to positive outcomes in the future.
Defining procrastination is problematic in the sense that it is an intraindividual process, something that depends on internal norms of what is late, when to start, and so on. To others, the behavior may or may not appear to be procrastination (Milgram, Srolof, & Rosenbaum, 1988). The activities that individuals typically procrastinate on may vary widely, from buying presents to filling out forms to calling friends on the telephone (Van Eerde, 1998). This shows that the unattractiveness of tasks may be highly personal. However, some of the dimensions that may underlie procrastination for most people will be discussed further on as one of the determinants of procrastination.
EXISTING RESEARCH
The literature on work-related procrastination is virtually nonexistent (exceptions are Ferrari, 1992; Harris & Sutton, 1983; Lay & Brokenshire, 1997; Lowman, 1993; Puffer, 1989). Most publications concern students' procrastination (see for an overview Ferrari, Johnson, & McCown, 1995) and largely concern cross-sectional self-report studies that relate the tendency to procrastinate to other psychological variables. A few studies on students have employed experimental designs (e.g. Milgram, Dangour, & Raviv, 1992; Senecal, Lavoie, & Koestner, 1997). Other publications on procrastination include self-help books (e.g. Burka & Yuen, 1983; Knaus, 1998) or those that take a clinical or therapeutic perspective.
In the available research on procrastination, the primary focus has been on the personality traits that influence avoidance behaviors of students. For example, in the Big Five Factor Model of personality, conscientiousness, and, to a lesser extent, neuroticism are related to trait procrastination, considered a lower-order trait (Johnson & Bloom, 1995; Schouwenburg & Lay, 1995). Within this approach, trait procrastination may result in behavior through different motives. One of the motives most often associated with procrastination is fear of failure (Ferrari et al., 1995), but also passive aggression, revenge, or other motives have been mentioned in publications. None of the studies have shown any ability factors associated with procrastination.
According to Milgram et al. (1998), different kinds of procrastination can be distinguished, such as academic, decisional, and compulsive procrastination. However, no strong empirical support is given for the distinction between these types, and the categorization appears to have been made according to different outcomes of the behavior. In order to classify procrastination, it may be more useful to specify the relevant dimensions of the psychological feature of situations and to establish whether arguments for specificity within or across situations can be made. This will be attempted in the section on the situational determinants, discussed later in this paper.
PSYCHOLOGICAL DYNAMICS
As described above, procrastination was defined as the avoidance of the implementation of an intention. As such, (proximal) self-regulation theories apply to procrastination, rather than (distal) motivation theories (see Kanfer, 1992). Procrastination is viewed here as a motivational mechanism, serving the purpose of avoiding a threat temporarily to protect one's well-being in the short term. Procrastination occurs when this threat is dealt with by an avoidance response, resulting in the postponement of the action.
Avoidance responses can be considered as emotion-oriented coping reactions (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984), specifically those that are characterized by escaping the problem. This explanation of procrastination is consistent with the appraisal-anxiety-avoidance model of procrastination (Milgram et al., 1998), which states that people assess whether a given situation poses a threat to them and whether they have the resources to deal effectively with this threat. If they perceive their resources to be inadequate, they react with stress/anxiety reactions and try to escape from the situation. In the case of procrastination, this escape means putting off doing the anxiety-provoking task as long as possible, and this avoidance leads to reduced stress, a negative reinforcement that helps sustain the pattern of behavior (Milgram et al., 1998, p. 299). Escaping the problem altogether is not always possible and can also be achieved through distraction, which serves to reduce, deny, or escape emotional distress, for example, calling someone instead of starting to write a complicated paper. The distraction is a less important but more pleasant action, an activity that can be taken up and abandoned within a short time span that takes the mind off the unpleasant intended action (Sabini & Silver, 1982). This is typically the type of activity that one regrets having done afterward because it was not on top of a priority list. Relatedly, procrastination may also be termed a lost "should-want" conflict (Bazerman, Tenbrunsel, & Wade-Benzoni, 1998). That is, a person acts on what he or she wants to do rather than on what he or she should do to receive future rewards.
Individuals do not appear to learn from previous incidents in which they procrastinated, and although they may try to stop it, they tend to procrastinate again in similar situations. As suggested previously, negative reinforcement plays a role in this repetition because procrastination alleviates stress temporarily. Additionally, the encoding of the situation may play a role, in particular encoding in terms of threat in appraising a situation and loss after the occurrence of procrastination
From India, Bangalore
THE RELEVANCE OF STUDYING PROCRASTINATION
Although procrastination is a widespread and easily recognized phenomenon that affects many at work, it is a neglected topic in work motivation. An increased understanding of the antecedents, motivational dynamics, and effects of procrastination will help identify the appropriate strategies to overcome the dysfunctional aspects of the behavior.
The theoretical relevance of procrastination lies in two neglected topics in work motivation, avoidance, and impulsiveness.
Avoidance
Most work motivation theories describe how motivation increases performance and enhances satisfaction, and how individuals actively try to achieve positive outcomes. Rarely is the focus on why people do not do things or how they avoid outcomes. Procrastination can be considered as an illustration of how people are motivated not to do things (see also Van Eerde & Briner, 1999) and how people sometimes avoid, rather than approach, outcomes. Approach and avoidance cannot be considered exact opposites (Higgins, 1997) or as consisting of interchangeable units (Locke, 1975). Rather, approach and avoidance are different dimensions, where avoidance is a reaction to threat, or generally "to avoid pain," and approach is a reaction to an incentive, "to attain pleasure." These two dimensions are the basis of hedonism. Modern work motivation theories have moved away from the hedonism base and have treated motivation as a predominantly cognitive process. However, it is still assumed that people strive to attain goals, values, or purposes, which are underpinned by human needs to avoid pain or to attain pleasure. The focus in acting is on a goal (Locke, 1975), and the goal is affected by notions of avoiding pain or attaining pleasure.
Recent research on action tendencies towards an attitude object suggests that reaction times to positive and negative words imply the avoidance of negative outcomes without conscious awareness (Chen & Bargh, 1999). Chen and Bargh (1999) suggested that an immediate, automatic response to threat may serve the purpose of preparing an individual for appropriate action even when attention is focused on conscious goal-directed activity or when attention is restricted in some way, for example, when a person is tired. Procrastination may be seen as task avoidance in the same sense.
Impulsiveness
Impulsiveness, or the opposite of the delay of gratification, has been studied extensively in children (Mischel, 1996) but has not been a topic of research in work motivation. However, impulsiveness may play a role when individuals are faced with multiple goals and need to decide what to do now and what to do later, as is often the case in any job that allows for some discretion in work scheduling. In other words, intertemporal choices need to be made. Intertemporal choice can lead to increased planning and greater analytical effort but can also be influenced by impulsiveness, a well-documented phenomenon in animals and humans in performing actions over time (Ainslie, 1975; Loewenstein & Elster, 1992). Impulsiveness is the preference for short-term outcomes over future rewards, even though these may be more valuable in an objective sense. This preference for immediate rewards, also called the inability to delay gratification (Mischel, 1996), is sometimes dominant to the extent that it may be called self-defeating. In procrastination, the long-term reward will follow the execution of an unattractive action. The impulsiveness shows itself when a person chooses a less important but more pleasant activity instead.
DEFINING PROCRASTINATION
Procrastination has typically been defined as a trait or behavioral disposition to postpone or delay performing a task or making decisions (Milgram, Mey-Tal, & Levison, 1998). This focus on dispositions has important shortcomings because intraindividual processes that may explain the differences between individuals remain uninvestigated. However, the dispositional approach may be reconciled with the idea that procrastination can also be described as a process. As such, procrastination involves the avoidance of the implementation of an intention. The avoidance is characterized by distraction with more pleasant activities or thoughts. The intention concerns a behavior that is experienced as emotionally unattractive but cognitively important because it will lead to positive outcomes in the future.
Defining procrastination is problematic in the sense that it is an intraindividual process, something that depends on internal norms of what is late, when to start, and so on. To others, the behavior may or may not appear to be procrastination (Milgram, Srolof, & Rosenbaum, 1988). The activities that individuals typically procrastinate on may vary widely, from buying presents to filling out forms to calling friends on the telephone (Van Eerde, 1998). This shows that the unattractiveness of tasks may be highly personal. However, some of the dimensions that may underlie procrastination for most people will be discussed further on as one of the determinants of procrastination.
EXISTING RESEARCH
The literature on work-related procrastination is virtually nonexistent (exceptions are Ferrari, 1992; Harris & Sutton, 1983; Lay & Brokenshire, 1997; Lowman, 1993; Puffer, 1989). Most publications concern students' procrastination (see for an overview Ferrari, Johnson, & McCown, 1995) and largely concern cross-sectional self-report studies that relate the tendency to procrastinate to other psychological variables. A few studies on students have employed experimental designs (e.g. Milgram, Dangour, & Raviv, 1992; Senecal, Lavoie, & Koestner, 1997). Other publications on procrastination include self-help books (e.g. Burka & Yuen, 1983; Knaus, 1998) or those that take a clinical or therapeutic perspective.
In the available research on procrastination, the primary focus has been on the personality traits that influence avoidance behaviors of students. For example, in the Big Five Factor Model of personality, conscientiousness, and, to a lesser extent, neuroticism are related to trait procrastination, considered a lower-order trait (Johnson & Bloom, 1995; Schouwenburg & Lay, 1995). Within this approach, trait procrastination may result in behavior through different motives. One of the motives most often associated with procrastination is fear of failure (Ferrari et al., 1995), but also passive aggression, revenge, or other motives have been mentioned in publications. None of the studies have shown any ability factors associated with procrastination.
According to Milgram et al. (1998), different kinds of procrastination can be distinguished, such as academic, decisional, and compulsive procrastination. However, no strong empirical support is given for the distinction between these types, and the categorization appears to have been made according to different outcomes of the behavior. In order to classify procrastination, it may be more useful to specify the relevant dimensions of the psychological feature of situations and to establish whether arguments for specificity within or across situations can be made. This will be attempted in the section on the situational determinants, discussed later in this paper.
PSYCHOLOGICAL DYNAMICS
As described above, procrastination was defined as the avoidance of the implementation of an intention. As such, (proximal) self-regulation theories apply to procrastination, rather than (distal) motivation theories (see Kanfer, 1992). Procrastination is viewed here as a motivational mechanism, serving the purpose of avoiding a threat temporarily to protect one's well-being in the short term. Procrastination occurs when this threat is dealt with by an avoidance response, resulting in the postponement of the action.
Avoidance responses can be considered as emotion-oriented coping reactions (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984), specifically those that are characterized by escaping the problem. This explanation of procrastination is consistent with the appraisal-anxiety-avoidance model of procrastination (Milgram et al., 1998), which states that people assess whether a given situation poses a threat to them and whether they have the resources to deal effectively with this threat. If they perceive their resources to be inadequate, they react with stress/anxiety reactions and try to escape from the situation. In the case of procrastination, this escape means putting off doing the anxiety-provoking task as long as possible, and this avoidance leads to reduced stress, a negative reinforcement that helps sustain the pattern of behavior (Milgram et al., 1998, p. 299). Escaping the problem altogether is not always possible and can also be achieved through distraction, which serves to reduce, deny, or escape emotional distress, for example, calling someone instead of starting to write a complicated paper. The distraction is a less important but more pleasant action, an activity that can be taken up and abandoned within a short time span that takes the mind off the unpleasant intended action (Sabini & Silver, 1982). This is typically the type of activity that one regrets having done afterward because it was not on top of a priority list. Relatedly, procrastination may also be termed a lost "should-want" conflict (Bazerman, Tenbrunsel, & Wade-Benzoni, 1998). That is, a person acts on what he or she wants to do rather than on what he or she should do to receive future rewards.
Individuals do not appear to learn from previous incidents in which they procrastinated, and although they may try to stop it, they tend to procrastinate again in similar situations. As suggested previously, negative reinforcement plays a role in this repetition because procrastination alleviates stress temporarily. Additionally, the encoding of the situation may play a role, in particular encoding in terms of threat in appraising a situation and loss after the occurrence of procrastination
From India, Bangalore
Hi Meenakshi,
The document that you have posted on procrastination is very good and resembles how we all postpone our daily activities. By reading this document, one can truly see themselves and can make a change with proper planning and dedication. It's true that one needs more energy to change than to sustain the change. However, if we don't adapt to the changes happening around us, we cannot progress in the journey of life or compete effectively, especially as HR professionals.
Regards,
Gowtam
From India, Hyderabad
The document that you have posted on procrastination is very good and resembles how we all postpone our daily activities. By reading this document, one can truly see themselves and can make a change with proper planning and dedication. It's true that one needs more energy to change than to sustain the change. However, if we don't adapt to the changes happening around us, we cannot progress in the journey of life or compete effectively, especially as HR professionals.
Regards,
Gowtam
From India, Hyderabad
Hi Meenakshi,
Your article was an enjoyable read. Generally, when I train, and this topic comes up, I mention four main reasons for people procrastinating, which are:
1. Fear of Failure,
2. Fear of Perfection,
3. Attitude of Rebellion,
4. Simple Laziness.
Cheers,
Anand
From United Kingdom, West Drayton
Your article was an enjoyable read. Generally, when I train, and this topic comes up, I mention four main reasons for people procrastinating, which are:
1. Fear of Failure,
2. Fear of Perfection,
3. Attitude of Rebellion,
4. Simple Laziness.
Cheers,
Anand
From United Kingdom, West Drayton
Looking for something specific? - Join & Be Part Of Our Community and get connected with the right people who can help. Our AI-powered platform provides real-time fact-checking, peer-reviewed insights, and a vast historical knowledge base to support your search.
Perf.mgt.articl e.doc
Performance Management Vivid Facet Article.pdf