Most goal-setting research has studied the use of goals to motivate performance in terms of outputs. The key parameter has been effectiveness as the extent to which output goals were reached. However, in today’s organizations that seek sustainability, efficiency, which in our paper refers to optimizing the use of worker inputs relative to outputs, has become more important. Therefore, we examined in three laboratory experiments the effects of input-output goals on effectiveness and efficiency. This approach allowed us to refine two key mechanisms of goal-setting: effort regulation and strategizing guidance. In addition to manipulating goal types, we examined goal framing (Study 1), as well as two potential moderators: task difficulty (Study 2) and compensation scheme (Study 3). Consistent with our hypotheses, participants with dual input-output goals (i.e., specific goals for both inputs and outputs) achieved higher efficiency (but not effectiveness) than did participants with other goal types. Across all three studies, participants with dual input-output goals reached lower revenues (i.e., outputs) but with even lower expenses (i.e., inputs) than did participants with mere output goals. These findings suggest that goal-setting operates through effort regulation rather than effort maximization. That is, participants invested as much effort as the goals required. Furthermore, these findings further indicate that goal-setting operates through strategizing guidance rather than strategizing activation, as participants adjusted their strategies based on the information provided by the goals. Overall, we showed that different goal types facilitated the cognitive process involved in goal pursuit to varying degrees.