Abstract A meta-analytic study was conducted involving primarily published research from 1966 to 1984 and focusing on the relationship between goal-setting variables and task performance. Two major sets of studies were analyzed, those contrasting hard goals (goal difficulty) versus easy goals, and those comparing specific hard goals (goal specificity/difficulty) versus general goals, “do best” instructions, or no goal. As expected, strong support was obtained for the goal difficulty and goal specificity/difficulty components of E. A. Locke's (1968a , Organizational Behavior and Human Performance , 3 , 157–189) theory. A two-stage approach was employed to identify potential moderators of the goal difficulty and goal specificity/difficulty—performance relationships. Setting (laboratory versus field) was identified as a moderator of the relationship between goal specificity/difficulty and task performance. Two supplemental meta-analyses yielded support for the efficacy of combining specific hard goals with feedback versus specific hard goals without feedback and for participatively set goals versus assigned goal setting (when goal level is held constant), although this latter finding was interpreted as inconclusive based on the limited studies available. Implications for future research are addressed.