There are a number of methodologies designed to distill the complex process of setting goals into a pattern that can be reliably duplicated, easily recalled and routinely applied. One such methodology commonly taught to anyone pursuing executive jobs is the SMART method. That is, goals should be Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic and Time-based. This all makes sense, seeming to encapsulate lots of wisdom in a memorable way.
Recent thinking suggests that this simplicity may be rather seductive, however, and ultimately misleading. Real world situations are rarely specific and measurable. Details change so rapidly that specificity as defined yesterday may mean little today. Similarly, new factors and obsolete data may change the way in which progress is measured, invalidating any time spent creating reliable metrics. If specificity and metrics change, so will ideas of what is practically achievable, and measuring realism is impossible with shifting constraints.
Do SMART goals have their place? Absolutely, and part of the art of setting goals is in knowing that place. Just as a craftsman uses the right tool for the job, so must the right approach be used for the right situation. SMART goals are useful for short-term accomplishments, goals for which the many variables will not have drifted sufficiently to render them meaningless. These methodologies also work well in simplistic environments, a fact that becomes more obvious when examining those who often espouse them. Take, for instance, the athlete striving to improve a game, or the student hoping to improve a grade. Not only are the scopes of either challenge more simplistic than those of typical management jobs, but the environments are also more sheltered, drifting variables kept in check by a number of coaches, teaching assistants and other supportive figures meant to help in the goal's achievement. The average executive landscape isn't quite so black-and-white.
So are goals absolutely useless? Not at all. Put simply, however, SMART goals are not always smart. Recent studies have shown that if the task domain is well understood then SMART goals work very well. They are not nearly as effective for situations where this is not the case, however. In these cases, it may be that the mental effort of setting goals and evaluating progress could better be spent on achieving the complex task. In other words, and contrary to conventional thinking, immeasurable goals such as ''I will do my best to achieve this task'' are far more reliable than is stopping to set a goal.
Setting goals is an important skill for executive jobs. The art of doing so effectively involves selecting the right tool for the task in question such that efforts are not hindered. In cases where short-term and well understood achievements are necessary, SMART goals make sense. For that broader array of more complex issues, fuzzier goals are a better fit.
