this division has led to attempts to integrate the two literatures which in turn has led to the following conclusions: For complex tasks a specific, challenging learning goal has a significant positive impact on performance. In contrast, goal orientation affects performance when goals are vague rather than specific and challenging. These conclusions have led to the following inferences: As goal setting skills, including how to set a hard, specific goal and when to set a performance rather than a learning goal, are trainable and have greater influence than goal orientation in terms of determining performance, then it follows that the usefulness of tests of goal orientation for recruitment are limited and perhaps most suitable for solitary jobs that offer little training. As well crafted appropriate goals mask the effect of goal orientation it seems likely that new employees assigned specific, high learning goals rather than performance goals will have better job performance regardless of goal orientation. Macro-level goals Macro-level goals refer to goal setting that is applied to the company as a whole. Cooperative goals reduce the negative feelings that occur as a result of alliances and the formation of groups. The most common parties involved are the company and its suppliers. The three motivators for macro-level goals are: self-efficacy, growth goals, and organizational vision. Sub-conscious goals Recent reviews of the available evidence suggests that goal setting theory applies to subconscious goals as well as consciously set goals. Subconsciously priming achievement goals through achievement related words and/or suitably triumphal photographs can significantly improve task and therefore job performance. Further enhancing this effect, context specific primes appear to induce substantially stronger goal effects. Furthermore, primed goals and consciously set goals work better together in improving task/job performance. Inevitably the use of sub-conscious goal with employees to improve work performance carries with it many potential ethical issues and concerns. General action and inaction goals Action goals encourage people to engage in more active behaviors, whereas inactive goals tend to result as inactive behaviors. Common action goals can be to do something, perform a certain act, or to go someplace, whereas typical inaction goals can take the form of having a rest or to stop doing something. Goal-regulated overall activity and inactivity tendency result from both biological conditions and social-cultural environment. Recent research revealed that most nations hold more favorable attitude towards action rather than inaction, even though some countries value action and