Page 120 - 33-3

Goal Consensus, Subordinates’ Prior Performances, and Supervisors’ Resource Allocation Preferences

Like most other studies, this research has several limitations. First, as in other studies,
there is the problem of generalization. Given the unique organizational context of the
case company, our results may not be generalizable to other companies. For instance, an
organization with sufficient resources to meet all the resource needs of its subordinates or

an organization whose relations between members are not task-directed may not face the
same difficulties as the case company discussed here. This is because when facing scarce
resources, both goal consensus and achievement orientation may encourage unequal

resource allocation.
Second, because of a lack of data, we are unable to directly measure whether regional
managers inequitably allocate resources among branch offices in the region. Instead, we
use residuals from the regression models to proxy allocate inequity, which may not fairly
or accurately represent the inequity caused by a regional manager’s resource allocation

decision. Moreover, irrespective of whether resource allocation preferences exist among
branch offices, it is not possible to confidently assert that inequity is intentional and
affected by goal consensus or branch offices’ prior performance.

Finally, as the concept of the level of goal consensus holds at a static point in time,
it would be inappropriate to treat goal consensus as though it is continuous. However, the
date of each survey response is unknown because it is the case company that helps us to
distribute and collect the surveys. Therefore, the only data records that we could assess are
the interval of time during which goal consensus occurred. In addition, we are unable to

calculate change in goal consensus because the case company’s assistance in this study is
limited to distributing the survey questionnaire once; there are thus no other channels by
which to contact the branch and regional managers of the case company.

Despite these potential limitations, the study yields empirical evidence of how
the supervisor–subordinate goal consensus and subordinates’ past performance affect
the supervisors’ resource allocation preferences. A salient feature of this study is that
it highlights the fact that resource allocation decisions among subordinates depend on
supervisor preferences and interests. Therefore, it is crucial for every organization to

understand how to distribute resources fairly, avoiding idiosyncratic preferences and self-
interest in decisions related to resource distribution. To resolve unfair resource allocation
problems, organizations must not only implement different control mechanisms to monitor

distribution processes but also encourage an atmosphere of open discussion and debate

112