Any experienced manager could tell you that for a goal to be effective in driving changes and performance, it has to be SMART - Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant and Time-bound. It's easier said than done.
How many times did we set SMART goals in the beginning of the year, only to realize in the middle of the year, or maybe even by year-end, that we are getting nowhere close to our aspired outcome? Researches suggest that goal setting remains an effective method, just that we may be doing it wrong.
In this article we will explore the first 2 elements of SMART - Specific and Measurable, which revolves around the construct of Goal Specificity in organizational psychology.
Goal Specificity - a construct proven to be effective
Decades of research in the organizational psychology field found that having a specific, measurable goal is better than a goal that only encourages a person to do your best. This is because specific goals focus our efforts towards activities that are relevant to the goal, and reduce ambiguity about performance expectations.
Neuroscience researches in the recent decade also found that by having a clear picture of aspired outcome, our brain's Default Mode Network would be activated, which encourages us to be motivated, willing to take challenges and open to change.
For this reason, companies often use reward systems such as sales incentive for this reason - to focus effort on driving sales and be clear about how performance is measured.
Specific goals may hurt effort under some circumstances
Yet under certain circumstances, specific goals may hurt effort, especially when the task of question is complex and new to a person. Once, I came across a hotel group company where they gave specific goals to each hotel's manager with regards to employee satisfaction rating. While expecting the managers to devise a holistic but customized strategy on employee engagement of their own hotel, they found that the managers resorted to pressurizing employees to give good ratings and cracking down on department heads whose department yielded sub-par ratings, which seems to be the quickest way to achieving the specific goal.
When a goal is complex, there would be a decrease in sense of control over the outcome. Therefore, when the person is asked to drive a specific goal under these circumstances, the person would tend to focus on short-term goal achievement instead of giving extra effort to solve a complex problem or drive for long-term results.
Effective goal requires a good balance
For a specific and measurable goal to be effective, it requires a good balance. On one hand, we want the goal to be specific enough to paint the ideal picture and remind us what we want to achieve; at the same time, it is important not to be too specific which could limit the room for creativity and innovation, which are particularly important when the goal is challenging and complex.
References
Boyatzis, R. E. (2008). Leadership development from a complexity perspective. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 60(4), 298.
Boyatzis, R. E., & Jack, A. I. (2018). The neuroscience of coaching. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 70(1), 11.
Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (2002). Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation: A 35-year odyssey. American psychologist, 57(9), 705.
Ordóñez, L. D., Schweitzer, M. E., Galinsky, A. D., & Bazerman, M. H. (2009). Goals gone wild: The systematic side effects of overprescribing goal setting. Academy of Management Perspectives, 23(1), 6-16.
Vroom, V. (1964). Expectancy theory. Work and motivation.
Comments