Get Everything Done

I know this topic has been discussed extensively but found the following article interesting

3D Juggling 431: The Sock Drawer
which can be found at
http://www.3dcoaching.blogspot.com/

particularly the point that whilst some people are driven by goals others are demotivated by them. There is a link to an interesting article on research in this area entitled "Are you a Goal Junkie?"

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_6778/is_2008_May/ai_n28521584/

Christine,

I did not read much of the "goal junkie" article because within a very few sentences this guy convinced me he can't THINK. He, right out of the gate, criticizes all goals because the "method" someone, in one case, chose to implement one goal had a bad result. This is somewhat like criticizing transportation because some cars crash.

In some previous exchanges there was talk about how you define these terms. I think this well illustrates why it is important to know what one is talking about.

I'm getting the impression that being "anti-goal" has become something of a fad!

Hi Mike

I do think you need to at least read to the end of the article before criticising but I have never got the impression that there is a fad of "anti goaliness". For me personally I find it refreshing to read that not everyone thinks the same about goals. In the same way that the MBTI enabled me to see that my way of doing things was consistent with my personality type rather than being abnormal, it is helpful for me to see that others have discovered that goals can evolve more naturally and still be valid and create the desired results without having to have been SMART or any other designated structure at the outset.

Mike, you do seem to be a little sensitive on the goals issue. For me the way people plan or goal set IS influenced by other factors such as personality typing etc - I do not see that one method is necessarily better than another in it's own right, but I do think that certain methods of goals planning will be "better" for some people than others.

In the same way that I aspire to complete orderliness, my means of reaching that "goal" as it were will be very different to the means in which you would reach that same goal. We would no doubt both have a plan but those plans would look very different and we would probably refer to them differently. Do you not agree?

Bobb Biehl wrote a book a while back that some people are motiviated to solve problems and some are motiviated to reach a goal. http://www.aylen.com/cartweaver2cf_Aylen/Details.cfm?ProdID=15&category=3

Someone who's motivated to solve a problem (what's the best route between Point A and Point B that avoids Point C?) may not be as motivated to reach a goal (get to Point B by Tuesday) The end result is the same - getting to point B - but the motivation is different.

He equated it to the difference (in sports) between someone playing a defensive position vs offensive position. Players who are good at defense may not be good in offense or vice versa. .

How people can perceive things so radically different. I find the goals discussion really interesting throughout all the threads. To echo something that has been echoed a good many times, pick the 'middle way'. The extremes (goalless vs goalaholic) usually aren't effective unless the context attunes to it. I think the article preaches the middle way.

At the very end the author states:

"The paradox, of course, is that to achieve such a drastic change in perception, attitude and behaviour, they need initially to set a vision of what such a change may look like. The challenge lies in whether this simply becomes another highly focused goal, or a sense of purpose, through which they seize opportunities to adopt new behaviours on their journey."

Where he mentions vision I think is one of the key points. Goals set without a clear vision/desired outcome are more vulnerable to being counter productive, whether they are set the SMART way or not. If you take the time to visualize the goal, you're more likely to identify the 'pulse'of the goal, i.e. are you setting this because you want it, or is it to please someone else (recipe for resistance).

I'll agree with Mike in that just because a SMART goal fails, it isn't because of something inherently wrong with setting goals/smart goals. Goals are tools, it's how you use them. When they are used incorrectly then obviously they don't work, but it's not the tools fault. I think the author made a few good points on how to use goals effectively.

On the 3D Coaching article, they said the following (emphasis mine):

"In fact, our DECISION to expand into new premises was the result of a conversation at our team awayday."

Hello? You made a decision to expand into new premises. That's a goal. At least in my dictionary, the definition of goal is "The purpose toward which an endeavor is directed; an objective."

If you aren't motivated by your goals, they really aren't right *for you*. Or the methods you're using to get there aren't right *for you*. I've had plenty of carrot type goals, but have put myself through many of the stick type of goals as well. That's why I enjoyed the goal junkie article, especially as I agree with him that adapting goals to changing circumstances is critical. I like adapting stick goals to carrot goals. :-)

A couch potato could have a New Year's resolution / goal of getting into really awesome shape in time for swimsuit season. They even plan the goal out in a SMART kind of way. So they sign up for a gym, schedule exercise time in their daytimers, buy a treadmill, go on a diet that's quite different from the way they usually eat, etc. etc. Probably only .01% or less of these types of goal-setters actually stick with their goal and get into great shape. After the initial honeymoon period, they're back to where they were, feeling like their goal was demotivating. I have seen a lot of people however, who followed a very structured 12 week program like Body for Life (I did this, I believe Mel did too) and got into the best shape of their lives. I think the difference is the clarity of the vision.

When it comes to methods though, if you aren't a person with a lot of self-discipline in a certain area, you need to set things up so you succeed in spite of yourself. Two years ago, I wanted to leave work at a reasonable hour and get more exercise - every day, not just when the weather was nice. I bought a golden retriever and could count on one hand the number of days I have missed either walking, jogging or biking ever since.

Clutterbuck referenced Herminia Ibarra (thanks! - I've been racking my brain trying to recall her name). I read her book on careers - and it was extremely valuable to me. It's called "Working Identity: Unconventional Strategies for Reinventing Your Career." It doesn't just focus on careers, it's a different way of thinking - more of an AF way.

http://www.amazon.com/Working-Identity-Unconventional-Strategies-Reinventing/dp/1591394139/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1243868820&sr=8-1#

"You might find the following article interesting"

Everything about that post rings true... for me anyway.

Hi Lillian

Interesting comment "that some people are motiviated to solve problems and some are motiviated to reach a goal."

As a confirmed "problem solver" type I wonder if I would be more motivated by goals if I looked at them as "How can I solve the problem of xxxx?"

Mark, that is one of your best articles (although they're all really good).

I have a couple of pages of notes on Pull vs. Push from your book "How to Make Your Dreams Come True" at the back of my AF book. I just have one question - wouldn't being in "Pull Mode" sort of conflict with following the AF rules at times ? I don't have the book here, but in my notes I have written: "... times it's easiest to live in Pull Mode - get a strong impulse to do something and the energy to do it comes bubbling up. Stop worrying about what I *ought* to be doing. Let go and have faith in the process."

Doesn't that kind of go along with following impulses and not sticking to the structure of AF?

Hi Jacqueline

When you say << On the 3D Coaching article, they said the following (emphasis mine):

"In fact, our DECISION to expand into new premises was the result of a conversation at our team awayday."

Hello? You made a decision to expand into new premises. That's a goal. At least in my dictionary, the definition of goal is "The purpose toward which an endeavor is directed; an objective." >>

that is very true but doesn't that typify a goal that has been "grown organically" to quote MF rather than a predetermined, fully defined, goal. To achieve anything (positive or negative) there will always have been a decision made, even if that decision was "do nothing".

Great illustration of creating circumstances to motivate (or push) you towards your goal and I'll bet the Golden Retriever has a lot more benfits than just his/her role as "Goal Enforcer"!

Hi Jacqueline

<< I don't have the book here, but in my notes I have written: "... times it's easiest to live in Pull Mode - get a strong impulse to do something and the energy to do it comes bubbling up. Stop worrying about what I *ought* to be doing. Let go and have faith in the process."

Doesn't that kind of go along with following impulses and not sticking to the structure of AF? >>

The impression I get from those notes is that describes the "standing out" process pretty much to a T. I guess though that you are referring to the "page by page" structure, so limiting the choice of tasks you will allow to "pull"

Goals and planning has worked well for me in situations when time is tight (eg during university or planning a wedding) and it really is necessary to sit down and co-ordinate a number of activities to make sure they get done on time. In general though it hasn't really worked very well, and I think that's because (a) deep down I know that day-to-day plans aren't urgent, (b) long-term plans are always shifting about, (c) goals are too boring and tedious to review regularly, (d) the goals that most inspire me are feelings, mental pictures, vague ideas etc, and most importantly (e) I don't know the steps to get from point A to point B.

With regard to item (e), any advice on achieving plans/goals where you don't know how to achieve the outcome? A lot of advocates of goal-setting/planning will say that it's just a matter of putting an entry on your to-do list of "learn more about XYZ" or "pick up a book on XYZ", but I've always found that to be a stumbling block -- if you want to operate a hotel in the Rocky Mountains but don't have any experience and have never lived in the area, then "learn more about operating a hotel" or "pick up a book about the Rocky Mountains" doesn't really cut it.

Personally I've found that it has worked better to have 10 or 15 goals along the lines of "operate a hotel in the Rocky Mountains", and then it's a matter of being open to opportunity. That goal would be achieved not by making a specific plan, but rather by at least being aware of the goal and then one day you pick up the newspaper and see a Rocky Mountain hotel for sale.

Still, I'd like to hear what people have to say about getting from point A to point B and sticking with the plan. How do you fill in the unknowns and adapt to new information? I read somewhere that you should rewrite your goals every night -- that way you not only stick with them but you continually adapt them as you learn more about what will be involved. Haven't tried that out though.

Hi Christine,

>>> I do think you need to at least read to the end of the article before criticising >>>

Read to the end of that article? And lose more minutes from my life? LOL ;-) I guess at this point I'd have to have someone convince me that even the level of effort necessary to READ a few pages is worth while.

It is not as if he said something really interesting ... he said something really dumb. And not just that it does not agree with my views ;-) But that it is irrational. "This guy planned something and it went wrong so setting goals is bad." Now I SUPPOSE that he could completely reverse himself on the next page ... but what would THAT tell me about his clarity of thought?

In general, I agree with you about reading the whole thing. But this guy is so far beyond silly that I won't incur even that small cost.

>>> but I have never got the impression that there is a fad of "anti goaliness". For me personally I find it refreshing to read that not everyone thinks the same about goals. >>>

I guess my point was that he does not bring anything fresh and new to the table ... there are lots of people who are anti-goal and anti-planning so I was musing that we seem to be going through some kind of cultural phase. It might be linked to the whole new age woo-woo thing we have been in for some time. Or it may be a throw back to the '60's and '70's where everyone was high, naked, and not thinking past the next party. I dunno. It certainly feels like we are in some kind of sea change.

>>> In the same way that the MBTI enabled me to see that my way of doing things was consistent with my personality type rather than being abnormal, it is helpful for me to see that others have discovered that goals can evolve more naturally and still be valid and create the desired results without having to have been SMART or any other designated structure at the outset. <<<

It could be that one of us has missed the point he was making. I'll assume it was me because I did not stick with him for the whole ride down the rabbit hole. ;-) Where the wheels left the cart for me was in his equating a "goal" with the "plan". SMART pertains to a goal ... it has nothing to say about the plan.

>>> Mike, you do seem to be a little sensitive on the goals issue. <<<

Not so much as you have gleaned, I guess. I'm more perplexed and astonished and, dare I say it, flabbergasted that anyone would take the position that knowing where one is going is a bad thing. I mean, other than a surprise party ;-)

>>> For me the way people plan or goal set IS influenced by other factors such as personality typing etc - I do not see that one method is necessarily better than another in it's own right, but I do think that certain methods of goals planning will be "better" for some people than others. <<<

I agree with that in general. BUT ... no matter how you get to a goal one must have a goal in order to get anywhere in particular (rather than just somewhere randomly). I acknowledge that some people prefer to just drift and be surprised at where they end up. But that is not a "planning methodology" so much as it is no plan or direction at all. Lots of people live that way. That is largely why some things don't work that well in our world today ... but that is another story ;-)

>>> In the same way that I aspire to complete orderliness, my means of reaching that "goal" as it were will be very different to the means in which you would reach that same goal. We would no doubt both have a plan but those plans would look very different and we would probably refer to them differently. Do you not agree? <<<

I completely agree there ... but notice that by the time you got to this point in your post you began to distinguish between "goal" and "plan". That is exactly what the writer of the article failed to do (at the point where I bailed on him.) Just for the sake of clarity:

1st - Decide if you have any destination at all
2nd - Define it as a goal and make it well-formed (SMART, if you like)
3rd - Put a plan in place
4th - Take action according to the plan
5th - Note feedback (Success? Failure? Frustration?)
6th - Modify the plan as suggested by the feedback.
7th - Go back to step 4 until the train pulls into your station ;-)

If you have no intention to do anything in particular, skip all of the above steps. If you have anywhere you'd like to be other than right here, hit ever step according to your best understanding and ability of how to plan and execute actions.

Just as I'm not dictating WHERE everyone should want to wind up, I'm not dictating what planning process works best for everyone nor what method of following that plan is best.

Hi Peter,

>>> How people can perceive things so radically different. I find the goals discussion really interesting throughout all the threads. <<<

Yeah, it is fascinating ... and I seem to have stepped in it again. Perhaps I should put a statement about the importance of goals in a Sig and save the typing? ;-)

>> To echo something that has been echoed a good many times, pick the 'middle way'. The extremes (goalless vs goalaholic) usually aren't effective unless the context attunes to it. I think the article preaches the middle way. <<<

Oh, is that what it does?

>>> At the very end the author states:

"The paradox, of course, is that to achieve such a drastic change in perception, attitude and behaviour, they need initially to set a vision of what such a change may look like. The challenge lies in whether this simply becomes another highly focused goal, or a sense of purpose, through which they seize opportunities to adopt new behaviours on their journey." <<<

See, but to me that is just so much new age babble. As soon as someone mentions "vision", I fasten my seat belt. It usually means that the road ahead is full of pot holes.

We used to talk about "goals", "plans", and "schedules". It was muddy enough with just those ideas. (Ex. When does a due date become part of the goal or part of the schedule?) Then one dismal rainy afternoon, when some out of work writer it the bottom of his bottle, he started writing about "visions". When he ran out of gas on that one he came up with "missions". Clarity of thought is not enhanced by proliferation of terminology.

If one tries to deconstruct that paragraph you cited it comes down to a mess of contradictory ideas. Why can one not "seize opportunities" while executing a plan leading to a goal unless one first defines a "vision"? Bull. Since when do we have to layer on levels of junk in order to just say ... plan ahead?

>>> Where he mentions vision I think is one of the key points. Goals set without a clear vision/desired outcome are more vulnerable to being counter productive, whether they are set the SMART way or not. <<<

I don't believe one can follow the SMART steps and not envision the outcome.

Specific - as compared to what? What level of specificity? That takes thinking about vagueness vs. a specific outcome.

Measurable - what is the measure? What units? How much? How little? All of that takes looking at alternatives.

Achievable - This takes considering ones resources, abilities, time frame, etc. All of that involves considering alternatives.

Etc. I don't get layering on "Once you have done all of that work, sit down and envision where you will end up." If you have not done that, you can not have done the other things. His first (and worst, I suppose) example involved someone who did not foresee an outcome he COULD NOT IMAGINE. Not that he did not try ... there is no evidence of that. These were sales and marketing people who he criticized for not being geopolitical economists.

>>> If you take the time to visualize the goal, you're more likely to identify the 'pulse'of the goal, i.e. are you setting this because you want it, or is it to please someone else (recipe for resistance). >>>

I have no problem with doing that. It is a good idea. I'm wondering how he thinks that one can produce a well-formed goal WITHOUT doing that. IOW, I don't see it so much as a seperate step as inherently bound up in every step.

I acknowledge that there are people who form goals like: "Dude, I'm gonna be a millionare by the time I'm 30." Then they take a hit of weed. That is NOT a well-formed goal and one should not criticize goals because ill-formed goals are apt to fail.

>>> I'll agree with Mike in that just because a SMART goal fails, it isn't because of something inherently wrong with setting goals/smart goals. Goals are tools, it's how you use them. When they are used incorrectly then obviously they don't work, but it's not the tools fault. <<<

Ooops, I should have read ahead one paragraph ;-)

>>> I think the author made a few good points on how to use goals effectively. <<<

Perhaps. Maybe he needs a good editor.

Jacqueline,

Yes, you nailed it. The problem with the "new year's resolution diet/exercisers" is that the goal is not REALLY well-formed. And the meta-plan (if I can call it that) has the feedback step missing. IOW, they don't look at the outcome of the small actions and alter what they are doing based on that. They go to the gym, hurt themselves and don't lose weight ... and give up. They don't think: "Should I try a different machine? Fewer reps? Lighter weights? Workout every OTHER day? Change my diet AS WELL?"

And your example of the dog well illustrates the point that one has to "plan for failure" (not plan TO fail ;-). "What can go wrong? What has gone wrong in the past? I've not walked EVERY day for a long period to get my body to a new set point. How can I ASSURE that I'll do it this time? Oh, I know, I'll set it up so someone depends on me to exercise. I'll get a dog. What heartless soul would get a dog and not walk it every day? What kind of dog? Oh, a BIG DOG, one that NEEDS LOTS of exercise." ;-)

When I work with people who want to stop smoking, I will spend an inordinate amount of time setting the circumstances such that if they fail, it has to be because they WANT TO FAIL. For example:

- Detail the car (to get rid of the smell of smoke)
- Wash the drapes. The whole house in fact. (As above.)
- Advertise your plan. (To put your ego at risk if you fail.)
- Make a terrible bet if you smoke again.
- Take up an aerobic sport so you need wind
- Etc.

I'm all for well-formed goals with lots of planning for what can go wrong and setting the right conditions for success.

Hi Simon,

>>> With regard to item (e), any advice on achieving plans/goals where you don't know how to achieve the outcome? A lot of advocates of goal-setting/planning will say that it's just a matter of putting an entry on your to-do list of "learn more about XYZ" or "pick up a book on XYZ", but I've always found that to be a stumbling block -- if you want to operate a hotel in the Rocky Mountains but don't have any experience and have never lived in the area, then "learn more about operating a hotel" or "pick up a book about the Rocky Mountains" doesn't really cut it. <<<

I have found that it does cut it. It is not JUST a matter of putting "learn more" on your list. It is a matter of making THAT a sub goal. HOW does one learn more? Read a book? Yeah, for a start. Or research on the web, maybe.

But is that enough. Not at all. Why not go on trips to the Rocky Mountains and stay at hotels or bed and breakfasts frequently and talk to the owners. Some people have joined an organization (I found this out on my last trip) which supports people who want to get into that field. It places them with owners who want to take vacations and they get to run a place for a few days to a week or a month at a time and really get into it. Most of them decide that it is not for them, once they realize the amount of work involved. But that is a valid outcome.

There are other "half-steps" you might take. Maybe move there in your current job area and explore the area over a longer period of time. Become part of the community. It all comes down to your level of commitment and your creativity.

For example, I own some property 3,000 miles from where I live. I was uncomfortable with the property manager and in my talking with people on-line found a person willing to drive 50 miles and give me an eyes-on report. Just a wonderfully nice stranger. People are like that. They will often do very nice things for you just because of who they are. I'd suggest that you commit to changing your life and move toward it at a pace that makes sense for you and keep reviewing your goal, taking feed back, and changing your plan.

>>> Personally I've found that it has worked better to have 10 or 15 goals along the lines of "operate a hotel in the Rocky Mountains", and then it's a matter of being open to opportunity. That goal would be achieved not by making a specific plan, but rather by at least being aware of the goal and then one day you pick up the newspaper and see a Rocky Mountain hotel for sale. >>>

Then what? Buy it and hope to hell you knew how to evaluate it, pay the right price, and operate it? And where would you get a loan with no operations experience under your belt? I'm all for serendipity, but that usually comes as a result of hard work on a focused goal. Just FWIW and IMHO and YMMV and all of that stuff ;-)

Christine, you said:

"doesn't that typify a goal that has been "grown organically" to quote MF rather than a predetermined, fully defined, goal."

What does that really mean? I don't think this goal as described was really that "organic" just because it arose from a conversation. My goals arise from conversations I have with myself (or a wiser version of myself - the one that doesn't know what it means to be afraid - or fail) all the time.

I don't think this kind of goal is any better than my type of goal of moving towards a vision of an ideal life. I don't think I'll ever really get there (or I'd be content if I did get there), but that doesn't matter - I'll be further ahead than if I never tried. Sometimes that means making a complete departure from the path that I'm on, but I've just put a bit of thought into it to try to define what makes me happy rather than following a bunch of whims (not that I've never done that). Fully defined doesn't mean competely rigid and not subject to change. It's an iterative process.


BTW Simon, I live in the foothills of the Rocky Mountains - here's one property listed:
http://www.albertafirst.com/realestate/Default.aspx?commercialforsale=1

Real estate prices have dropped in AB and BC quite a lot lately. Which part of the Rockies are you interested in?

RE Mike on visualization :
Mike said "Clarity of thought is not enhanced by proliferation of terminology."

Why Mike you do have a penchant for creatively counterarguing points for the simple point of counterarguing, even if you haven't read the article. It's interesting that in one thread you're heralding the novel concept of multisensory learning and playing down the idea of using forms of visualization in a next. Ah yes, but the difference is you're arguing different points in different threads for the sake of..ah yes for what?:)

To respond to the visualization thing though to which you refer to as 'new age babble'. I think the points raised in the article are that smart goals often fall short. I know in my experience they have, no matter how precise I've set them. I highlight the vision-element to goalsetting because if you're undertaking a major goal/objective you can gain much more leverage much than just setting a smart goal if you spend some time thinking about what the outcome would look and feel like.

Case in point, let's suppose your weed-loving wanne-be millionaire had set a smart goal. '1 million dollars in my swedish bankaccount before my 30st birthday'. Even if that wanne-be goes in to wallstreet and makes a tidy fortune by his birthday and he's met his smart goal, he still might not really have achieved the outcome that he really wanted. He might be up to his ears in responsibilities, have no time for family and hate the job he does, but he still has met his smart goal.

It's an exaggerated but common enough example. However, if you're going to do something that requires planning and goals to be set, why not spend a few minutes visualizing what the outcome would actually feel like - especially if you're going to spend a large volume of work to accomplish it. Your wanne-be milliionnaire would more likely pick up on the desire to have a certain lifestyle, not have to work 80 hour week and do a job he loves while achieving his goal to a million dollars. See the point is people skip from a smart goal to an outcome that seems logical at the time, but really doesn't plot the trajectory as nicely as you think. Visualizing greatly enhances the detail of the intended destination in expanded ways.

Policy makers make those mistakes all the time. They look at the numbers and have objectives that need to fit these quantifiable outcomes. My uncle mentioned a hospital policy of having to take care of x amount of patients in IC by x amount of time. Sure the hospital met the rule, but they cheated so they could meet the requirement by keeping people longer in the ambulance since the time didn't start running until the patient actually was inside IC.

If however the policy makers would ask a doctor 'what does a better run hospital look like' and then use our goal-oriented minds to achieve that, you might have a different story.

Really, the brain is continually drawing and using visual information continually, whether you are conscious or not. For something as simple as 'looking for your keys' the brain involves a whole array of brain functions and it does so with little conscious effort. Little conscious effort is needed to visualize an intended outcome and have the mind go to work on it. Something AF also excels at : leveraging the subconscious processes to great effect.

Mike said "Clarity of thought is not enhanced by proliferation of terminology."
Isn't the enneagram a hodge podge of opinions of different authors who don't agree but use loads of terminology. If you add in all the wing-types you get hundreds of different combinations that are all interpreted differently by different 'experts'. If that isn't that diluted proliferation of terminology I don't know what is. Good thing I still find it interesting though:) Norman U would probably say 'Too much b.s. about personality, just be a person.

oops, digressed.

Mike, the problem though is that "learn more" is basically the entire plan at the beginning. And if operating a hotel in the Rockies is one of say 15 or 20 "someday/maybe"-type items, then it's not really practical to take the steps that you've listed. I wouldn't move across the country just to explore a someday/maybe item.

This is where I always get stuck -- anything worth planning for always involves a huge amount of unknowns and often seems to break down at the "learn more" stage. If I already know all the steps, then why make a plan, unless I need to co-ordinate them all in a very short period of time? The appeal of the bottom-up approach is that you can keep 20 irons in the fire and then move forward on each iron as opportunity/more information arises.

I was thinking though that one way of dealing with unknowns is to revise/rewrite the plan very regularly. How do other people deal with situations where 80% of the plan is unknown at the time of planning?

Jacqueline, I'm not really thinking of moving to the Rockies -- I was just tossing that out as a random example. Beautiful area though -- I live in Toronto but I lived in Vancouver for 10 years and I really do miss the west.

Hi Mike

I do wonder if we're even talking about the same article - he quotes an example to illustrate the fact that just because a goal is SMART doesn't mean it will be achieved. He then goes on to clarify why and look at different options - and how is that so dumb? And as for length of article ..... I suspect you and I have both written longer posts!! :-)

<<BUT ... no matter how you get to a goal one must have a goal in order to get anywhere in particular (rather than just somewhere randomly). I acknowledge that some people prefer to just drift and be surprised at where they end up. But that is not a "planning methodology" so much as it is no plan or direction at all. Lots of people live that way. That is largely why some things don't work that well in our world today ... but that is another story ;-) >>

I fully agree that planning is essential but not all the time. Now, I just know I am going to be shot down for this but hey, whatever .....

I used to watch travel programs and think I would love to live on a marina. It was not something I made into a goal or ever seriously thought of doing. It was a dream, a wish, a someday/maybe item, just a thought. Whenever I saw a marina I thought about it but rarely otherwise. Then I decided it would be nice to have a weekend cottage - a place to get away. Just a thought - no goal, no intensive planning. I thought about it. I thought some more. I looked in Estate Agents windows. I daydreamed. Then someone mentioned they had done just that, and bought a cottage near to a marina, only about 50 miles away. Marina - what marina? I hadn't even known it existed (well it was pretty new at the time). So, I took myself off to the area, thinking it would be nice to live "near" a marina, registered interest with a couple of agents, and 18 months later had an apartment with amazing views straight down the marina. Sure there were areas of planning but for me this was closer to what you describe above as "just drifting and being surprised where I ended up". Maybe it is not "planning methodology" but just taking advantage of what came along ..... all I know is that I have the perfect place to live without all the hassle of being too SMART about it :-)

Mark Forster:

I haven't read the book yet, just the reviews (some interesting comments on amazon!), but I snatched it for a couple of pounds. The push, drift and pull modes do raise a question for me:

If I'm visualizing push mode, I'm supposing the problem with that is the associated friction it creates, if I were to push a person (i.e. motivate him/her), what stops it from easily happening if I were to physically do this, is the friction of the floor surface interacting with the pressure I apply. If this person gets pulled however, there still is friction, it's just a different way of moving a person.

I think AF and other strategies are applied greatly because they help hurdle, avoid or work through friction with the least amount of effort.. What I'm keen to create is a downhill path with as little friction as possible. Or in other words a comfortable enjoyable journey. (although I realize the unintended bumps in the roads often contribute the most to a satisfying life)

So is the book about inspiring action/ using intrinsic motivation to achieve goals, or is the metaphor more about the opposite of pushing yourself toward goals, by having the goals pull you towards them? I think what I really mean to say is, is push and pull mode similar to the difference between using intrinsic and extrinsic motivation? I guess in that context the line between drift and pull mode can be very vague at times.

Mark, that's a very good strategy, and in fact just by mentioning the idea in the forum Mike came up with a few ideas I wouldn't have thought of.

Peter raises another key issue for me. A lot of things I would really like to do are mental "pictures" at this point. I visually know where I would like to live 10 years from now -- I can picture my desk and the view from my window quite clearly. But to turn that into a written "goal" or plan -- not that easy. At best it's an approximation -- sort of like describing a photograph in words falls short of the actual image. Always, it's the mental image that I want, rather than achieving the written approximation.

It's amazing though how many of those mental images eventually become reality. I was driving down Highway 1 from San Francisco a few months ago through Big Sur, and there was a moment when I realized that one of those mental images from 10 years earlier had come to life.

Simon, I think you do have to become comfortable with unknowns at some point.

At the end of this year, I just have a few fairly vague goals where I'm not sure how I'm going to achieve them or how. Today I had one of the finance directors where I work ask if I would come work in their group after I'm done my stint here. If I wasn't very clear about what I *don't* want at least, I would probably take this opportunity which has been placed in my lap. But it's not what I want, or even a step towards what I do want. But I didn't tell her no directly anyway - doesn't hurt to keep your options open. :-)

Re. moving forward from a vision. Mark has a section in "How to Make Your Dreams Come True" on the ideal life he wishes to have. I first did something similar to this a long time ago when reading Barbara Sher's book "Wishcraft". She has a concept in the book called "Your Ideal Day" - when you write the narrative, you discover what she calls your "touchstone" - kind of similar to your purpose / highest value.

When you identify what your goal is using her system, you use a backward planning method where you figure out what you would have to do before the goal is met to achieve it, and keep working backwards until you arrive at a flowchart where you have a step that is actionable right now. Then you just have to work through the flowchart (modifying it as things change).

I can't recommend this book highly enough. It's a classic and been around for 30 years still in print for a reason. Here's a better description of what I'm talking about.
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/379196/how_to_plan_for_ones_goals_in_life.html?cat=7

Very interesting Jacqueline! I've done an exercise where you describe your ideal life. Loads of incredible success stories from doing that exercise.

I think once again that's the benefit of the visualisation element. You don't need to know the step by step and you can even go beyond what you currently think is possible. I've got numerous stories on how simple visualisation has worked for me. The flowchart you mention element is interesting. Sounds about the same as back-from-the-future thinking technique (might be an nlp thing). Although as others have noted, there are so many uncertains in life, you can't specifically incorporate them in a plan. I think the key is that you feel confident in achieving something and that belief carries over into taking the appropriate actions with the appropriate attitude.

Funny while browsing to Mark's book how to make your dreams come true, the 2nd book that comes up is Cosmic Ordering. That book describes a list method to creating a desired life. I sheepishly admit to having had some remarkable success with that method as well! Even worser still is that I found out about the book while reading 'woman's own' (there are some remarkable stories in their too). Don't ask me why I read that magazine, and no I don't have a subscription to that - I was just killing time:)

Jacqueline... that's hilarious. My first thought when reading this thread was: Wishcraft!!!

Wishcraft is the only... THE ONLY... self help book I recommend to clients who:

a) have trouble identifying what it is they are passionate about
b) have a goal, but aren't sure how to reach it

Many years ago, I used the book/exercises to help forge many of the projects which are now bearing fruit (mostly creative, not financial).

Good Morning Peter,

>>> RE Mike on visualization : Mike said "Clarity of thought is not enhanced by proliferation of terminology."

Why Mike you do have a penchant for creatively counterarguing points for the simple point of counterarguing, >>>

Just lucky, I guess.

>>> even if you haven't read the article. <<<

Ah, I think I explained why I would not bother reading any MORE of that drivel. I had read "enough".

>>> It's interesting that in one thread you're heralding <<<

"Heralding"? With trumpet and all? ;-)

>>> the novel concept of multisensory learning and playing down the idea of using forms of visualization in a next. Ah yes, but the difference is you're arguing different points in different threads for the sake of..ah yes for what?:) <<<

Either you missed my point, I I was unclear. I am NOT against visulaization ... I think it is a good thing. I am against "visions" ... as in "having a vision". I'm also against taking visualization out if its working context. In the case discussed here, the writer says that SMART goals are no good because they will fail unless you perform some extra step he calls having a vision. I think I explained how you can't have a SMART (i.e. well-formed) goal without doing enough work to show you the future. It is not sensible to think you have a well-formed goal but that it won't work unless you do something extra ... something that accomplishes what you need in order to have the goal in the first place. It is just muddy thinking.

>>> To respond to the visualization thing though to which you refer to as 'new age babble'. I think the points raised in the article are that smart goals often fall short. I know in my experience they have, no matter how precise I've set them. I highlight the vision-element to goalsetting because if you're undertaking a major goal/objective you can gain much more leverage much than just setting a smart goal if you spend some time thinking about what the outcome would look and feel like. <<<

See, you've switched the frame of the argument there. We were not talking about "leverage". We were talking about setting well-formed goals.

As to "what it would look and feel like" ... I'm not sure how one sets a well-formed goal without that step. Maybe it is just that how I set goals is vastly different than you? I seriously doubt it,though.

>>> Case in point, let's suppose your weed-loving wanne-be millionaire <<<

His name is Dude, IIRC. ;-)

>>> had set a smart goal. '1 million dollars in my swedish bankaccount before my 30st birthday'. Even if that wanne-be goes in to wallstreet and makes a tidy fortune by his birthday and he's met his smart goal, he still might not really have achieved the outcome that he really wanted. He might be up to his ears in responsibilities, have no time for family and hate the job he does, but he still has met his smart goal. <<<

Oh, where to start ;-) Firstly, that is a pretty poor goal statement. It meets some of the technical points for a well-formed goal, but it is FAR from specific enough. Well, maybe that is not stating the problem well enough. One Million dollars is specific and measurable but there is no plan behind it. How does one get One Million dollars? Dose it fall from the sky? What does he have to DO? What steps does he take and how does it assure that he is on course.

But that aside, I think your point is that his goal, once achived, turns out to be not what he would have wanted had he known where it would lead. Granted. However, what makes you think he could have known where it would lead from where he was standing when he made the goal? I have found that people can't make well-formed goals that are "too far" ahead of where they are now. The weed smoking kid has not a clue what One Million bucks is, nor what it entials to "create" it ... another concept he probably lacks. A well-formed goal for him would be more like: "My goal is to have a full time job next month and $1,000 in the bank by the end of the year." That kind of thing is more "real" to him than One Million bucks.

Maybe you would say that he can "visualize" that more easily than the $1M. Be that as it may, he does not need to go into a trance ... the simple statement of the goal brings enough awareness to allow problems to be foreseen. If he plans to get a job, "interviews" and "want ads" probably pop right into his head. If his goal is $M, his "visualization" is new cars, yachts, private jets, night clubs, snorting coke ;-) all things that have to do with how he will FEEL once he has it and nothing at all to do with how he will have to act to get it and since that part is missing, the problems of demands on his time will also be. So trancing out won't do it for him. There is probably no way he can get that information from where he is right now. He has to take smaller steps.

>>> It's an exaggerated but common enough example. However, if you're going to do something that requires planning and goals to be set, why not spend a few minutes visualizing what the outcome would actually feel like - especially if you're going to spend a large volume of work to accomplish it. Your wanne-be milliionnaire would more likely pick up on the desire to have a certain lifestyle, not have to work 80 hour week and do a job he loves while achieving his goal to a million dollars. See the point is people skip from a smart goal to an outcome that seems logical at the time, but really doesn't plot the trajectory as nicely as you think. Visualizing greatly enhances the detail of the intended destination in expanded ways. <<<

As we both said, he will focus on the lifestyle and not the 80 hour weeks. How could it be otherwise with him having no experience?

>>> Policy makers make those mistakes all the time. They look at the numbers and have objectives that need to fit these quantifiable outcomes. My uncle mentioned a hospital policy of having to take care of x amount of patients in IC by x amount of time. Sure the hospital met the rule, but they cheated so they could meet the requirement by keeping people longer in the ambulance since the time didn't start running until the patient actually was inside IC.

If however the policy makers would ask a doctor 'what does a better run hospital look like' and then use our goal-oriented minds to achieve that, you might have a different story. <<<

The rule is: "You get what you measure." The problem was not lack of vision, but lack of proper measurement -- or maybe just a different goal than health. Doctors are measured by time, (not creating a good outcome for the patient) so they limit time and medicine suffers. That is not lack of vision, or visualization, it is simply a differing goal. The insurance companies are not in the business of health, they are in the business of making money. Until it starts to become expensive for them to have unhealthy patients they will continue as they have. You don't seriously think these insurance executives (hospital administrators) would have a "vision session" and dream about smiling happy patients. No, they'd dream of happy smiling executives with big performance bonus checks and private jets and all.

>>> Really, the brain is continually drawing and using visual information continually, whether you are conscious or not. <<<

For those who are primarily visually oriented. Some are more auditory and are drawn by voices in their head, etc.

>>> For something as simple as 'looking for your keys' the brain involves a whole array of brain functions and it does so with little conscious effort. Little conscious effort is needed to visualize an intended outcome and have the mind go to work on it. <<<

Ah, but that is what I was saying ... the act of formulating a well-formed goal involves looking ahead ... but only as far as one can, given where one is standing now.

>>> Mike said "Clarity of thought is not enhanced by proliferation of terminology."

Isn't the enneagram a hodge podge of opinions of different authors who don't agree but use loads of terminology. If you add in all the wing-types you get hundreds of different combinations that are all interpreted differently by different 'experts'. If that isn't that diluted proliferation of terminology I don't know what is. <<<

Good point, that. I don't see the discussion of the way people act as terminology, nor different wing combinations. I see terminology as "Type", "Wing", etc. But your point is still valid ... that is a boat load of terminology. And it is not so much that people differ in there interpretation ... people always will. That is another problem entirely.

But you can make an even stronger case that the whole field of psychology is burried in unnecessary and conflicting terminology. It is not a good thing. But it is so ingrained in the system that it is pretty hard to fight it. But I will ... where do I sign? ;-)

>>> Good thing I still find it interesting though:) Norman U would probably say 'Too much b.s. about personality, just be a person. <<<

I'm sure he would ;-)

>>> oops, digressed. <<<

For shame!!!! ;-)

Isn't there also the problem that someone could have a wonderful SMART goal that they've envisioned and still not achieve it? If there is no success, does that mean that the SMART approach or mental rehearsal do not "work"? IMO if you have someone with sufficient motivation, the goal will be achieved barring external obstacles that cannot be overcome (e.g., I can be as motivated as possible to become the next American Idol, but I wouldn't make it past the screeners - lol). With enough motivation, supportive techniques like SMART either become automatic or irrelevant. With too little motivation, supportive techniques can assist goal achievement, but are not sufficient for success.

"With too little motivation..."

I find, for me anyway, a positive correlation between breaking down my goals via SMART-ish tricks and my disinterest in said goal/task. In other words, if I need to invest too much time in planning, I don't really care too much about the goal.

Hi Jacqueline, thanks for the suggestion. It would be nice to have an external system for organizing thinking about more complex projects, and then sprinkle the resulting tasks onto the AF lists. I found Barbara Sher's book online last night (http://www.wishcraft.com/) and skimmed chapter 6 on backward planning. I really like the 'lever' she uses to break down tasks into smaller components -- can you do this tomorrow? If not, what do you need to do first?

Whenever I see a movie about a tightly-executed bank robbery, I always wish they'd show the planning process. How do fictional bank robbers organize a complex plan that has to work like clockwork? What's the mental process? I wonder what kind of software they use :)

"can you do this tomorrow? If not, what do you need to do first? "

Simon - I agree with you. What an excellent approach to breaking down a complex goal into a "what can i physically do tomorrow" task.

@Simon -- Highway 1 and Big Sur!!! Wow I miss that area. I grew up in the Santa Cruz area. Now I live in the Arizona desert -- I really miss the trees.....

@Andreas -- Don't know if you're reading this thread! But it looks like there's another programming opportunity above! (Simon's post: "How do fictional bank robbers organize a complex plan that has to work like clockwork? What's the mental process? I wonder what kind of software they use :)").

@Mike -- I really don't know why this "conflict" keeps coming up. I, for one, am perfectly happy having some goals as SMART goals (when that's appropriate, necessary, and useful), and other goals (oops, maybe "underspecified objectives" would be more acceptable?) that are not SMART (or perhaps, in some cases, not SMART *yet*). The fact that some of us use different methods doesn't mean we don't plan.

Regarding "vision" and "mission statements" -- Scott Adams (Dilbert) wouldn't be in business if it weren't for concepts like these that get misused and abused and are perhaps fundamentally flawed at least in the way they are generally practiced. But still, there is nothing quite so helpful in a large organization as a leader who can define and communicate a vision of where the organization should be going, and how to get there. The Exec VP of my division where I work is like that. It helps everyone understand the overall business strategy, and helps us see how our day-to-day work aligns with it. But whenever someone in Employee Communications decides to boil it down into a poster with a few bullet points, it almost inevitably becomes worthy of mockery.

I guess the thing that gets you riled up is the "visionaries" are great at painting pictures and creating an overall impression of something grand, but fail to provide the concrete actions and details that are needed to make it a reality. I think the right word for people like that is CHARLATAN.

But the thing that gets other people riled up are the "functionaries" who are pretty good at habitually setting SMART goals that attain their purpose, but aren't able to explain (to others or to themselves) WHY this particular goal is so important and useful and necessary, and therefore can't MOTIVATE anyone.

A real LEADER, it seems to me, is someone who can envision and articulate the large goals but also make them real, practical, SMART, with all the feedback systems and everything else you mention to make them really work, but also with answers to all the WHY questions that helps make sure they are the RIGHT goals and that people are motivated to work towards them.

Anyway, just some rambling thoughts...

Mel,

"Becoming the next American Idol" is not a well-formed goal. Why? Because it is not within your control. You can have a goal to become the best singer you can be. You can also have a goal to write songs. But if the outcome depends on the actions of others, the goal is not well-formed. That is not to say that it is not a DESIRE to become the American Idol. (Though why, I can't even begin to imagine ;-) You can also have it as a goal to tryout for the competition.

Simon,

>>> Mike, the problem though is that "learn more" is basically the entire plan at the beginning. And if operating a hotel in the Rockies is one of say 15 or 20 "someday/maybe"-type items, then it's not really practical to take the steps that you've listed. I wouldn't move across the country just to explore a someday/maybe item. >>>

There are other things that affect it. Is it really a "someday/maybe" or is it a "goal". Just because it is not coming to completion tomorrow does not mean it is "someday/maybe". Secondly, there is the question of priority. Yes, if you have 15 or 20 things all with the same priority, I'd say that none of them had any priority at all. They are all just dreams. If you really WANT to run that hotel, or whatever, then make it a goal and get to work on it. It may happen that in your reading, and correspondence with other operators, and your subscription to hotel operators of the Rockies (or what ever ;-) you decide it is not for you. Hopefully you learn that before you uproot and move. That is why "learn more" is the first step in almost any project.

>>> This is where I always get stuck -- anything worth planning for always involves a huge amount of unknowns and often seems to break down at the "learn more" stage. If I already know all the steps, then why make a plan, unless I need to co-ordinate them all in a very short period of time? The appeal of the bottom-up approach is that you can keep 20 irons in the fire and then move forward on each iron as opportunity/more information arises. >>>

I'm not sure what you are saying. In the first part of that it seems that you have lots of unknowns and have to learn. In the second you seem to know the steps. I'm confused, again ;-)

>>> I was thinking though that one way of dealing with unknowns is to revise/rewrite the plan very regularly. How do other people deal with situations where 80% of the plan is unknown at the time of planning? <<<

I've seldom had plans for anything exciting that did NOT have that much or more unknown! And yes, that is what planning really IS. A plan is not static. It must be revised regularly to take into account the changing situation.

My wedding plan, for example, was huge (as personal plans go). I had it in a PERT/CPM system and stuck on the wall. I would continually revise it:

- Find venue (can't make date work)
- - Hold it in my back yard. Add all the tasks necessary to replace the lawn, deep clean the house, etc.

- Find minister (canceled at the last moment)
- - Find new minister

- All kinds of plans to shop for wedding dress
- - Lovely bride got her perfect dress from eBay for $80.00!!! Scratch all those no longer needed tasks.

Each day, it seemed, I updated the plan with completions that involved additions, deletions,and modifications. I could have winged it and we'd have been just as married. But it would not have pleased her as much and weddings are all about the bride. The groom is just there for decoration ;-)

Hi Mark,

I agree that goals can be worded in such a way as to make them dull. But that is a choice, is it not? Probably what they paid you to tell them was how to put the tinsel, lights and popcorn on the goals. The problem is not with the goal, in this case, it is with how it is "presented".

And it also occurs to me it is a question of who you are talking to. "Raise profit by 20%" or whatever, might be a really sexy goal to some people. It just depends.

Simon, Avrum,

"Backward Planning" is vanilla PERT/CPM. You put a "bubble" at the extreem right of your page with the final outcome you wish. Then you put to the left of that, bubbles for all of the things that have to happen for that to occur. Continue the process for each "bubble" until you reach the point where every "bubble" on the extreem left of your page is something you could do today (or if not today, at least has no dependencies or things you have to do first ... IOW, some bubbles may just need to wait for some external event). What you have now is a classic "network" of tasks with all dependencies shown. If you wish to take it further, you add required resources, man hours (or clock hours) necessary to complete, etc. If you put it into sofware, all of the tedious calculation is done to produce the "Critical Path" which shows you the items in the plan which, if they are not completed on time, will delay the project.

The concept is simple but the method is powerful. I'd venture to say that we all do this subconsciously when we have any kind of goal.

Apart from olympic gold, I think exceptional goals can be reached just by participating:
- The only Idol candidate I knew, was never there to win and ended up doing the World Idol stuff in 2003.
- I also remember a discrete MP helping to distribute election fliers in mailboxes or something alike for a local election. When I asked her how she became a MP, she said she was there early and grew up with her party over the years, so it was more something like 'little and often'.

Christine,

>>> I do wonder if we're even talking about the same article - he quotes an example to illustrate the fact that just because a goal is SMART doesn't mean it will be achieved. He then goes on to clarify why and look at different options - and how is that so dumb? <<<

It is not so dumb, if that were what he said. But he said a bit of everything in just the first few sentences. I began to see how he was contradicting himself very early on.

>>> And as for length of article ..... I suspect you and I have both written longer posts!! :-) <<<

I'm quite sure of that ;-) I'd also say that either of us would write better posts than that article. ;-)

>>> I fully agree that planning is essential but not all the time. Now, I just know I am going to be shot down for this but hey, whatever ..... <<<

<click, click>

Your story had a happy outcome. Yay for you! ;-) How many people dream such things and never get them? My point is that if you really WANT something, you have to DO something. And not only DO something, but do SOMETHING (in particular). That is where a plan comes in. Plans are only for people who really intend to get something in particular done.

I spent a while in Panama on a contract. I learned some functional Spanish there and would like to improve it. I've had this idea for some years now. Do you know how much closer I am to that outcome? I don't have a ruler calibrated in distances that small! ;-) The thing is, I have the books, and courses. I know the theory of learning languages. I have learned a few languages in the past. But I have not laid out a PLAN, nor have I taken any action. So I have exactly the result I "planned" for ... nothing. I have the thought that I might, but not the specific intention.

My father died suddenly and I was really knocked for a loop. It put me in the mind of "what have a always wanted to do but have put off". Many, many years ago I flew in a small plane and loved it. I had always "thought" I might "like to do that someday". Decades passed. My father died and I was "motivated". Once I had the motivation, I began planning ... and if you think you can get a private pilot's license without a plan, dream on. There is a staggering amount to learn ... and practice ... and amass the money for ... and make the time for. Within a year after my father's death I was flying around the countryside.

Now I did eventually drop it. It is expensive and once I had achieved my goal, and satisfied my desire, I could not justify the monumental expense. But I got to my goal because I planned for it. I planned for it because I was motivated and I moved through the plan because of other motivation. Years (decades, actually) of feeling it would be wonderful to fly did not get me there. Determination and a plan did.

So there are two counter examples with different outcomes.

Right now I want to move to the Midwest ... the very Arizona that some here wish they could move away from ;-) I do NOT have a plan so nothing is getting done. I don't like a lot of things about where I live now. But the balance has not tipped yet. There are many costs to consider and as of yet, I'm not sufficiently motivated. Once I am (IF I am) I'll put in place an extensive plan. I've moved before so I know the steps, but I would not work from memory on something this big ... I'd have a whole book full of plans and checklists. And I'd change it all as I went along.

Just FWIW.

Mark,

O.K. SMART goals (what I prefer to call "well-formed" goals. So far as I know, nothing in the SMART formula restricts the wording. It only dictates what bases you need to have covered. For example, goals must be specific and measurable. That could mean wording it as:

"I will have a private pilot's license by the end of this year."

or it could be worded as:

"I will have a private pilot's license by the end of this year so I can fly the open country and visit places I've never been before."

I don't see the well-formedness of a goal restricting it so much as assuring that the essentials are present. The wording of a goal can be as rich or impoverished as one likes, I suppose.