Goals Should Be Well Defined To Track Real Achievement

Goal-setting phase is an important first step in the direction of planning, to grow, change, become differentiated and take some moonshot goals that can maximise potential to make the financial year count.

And yet, goal-setting can become a repeated ritual where you don’t get to engage with the performance management system and rewards unless you have a goal sheet. It becomes a check-in-the-box exercise by repeating last year’s goals or copying each other’s goals to ensure a goal sheet is submitted.

A strong goal-setting activity can ideally establish the north star for inspiring action and creative problemsolving, but can lapse into a formality for deciding how individuals can be rewarded at the end of the year. Where goal-setting becomes a weak starting point for objective feedback on real contributions, the organisation erodes opportunities for becoming a true meritocracy.

Besides, when goals are set individually in the context of departments and individuals, the energies get dissipated, leading to confusions between effort and performance.

Contemporary approaches like OKRs (objectives and key results) can align and integrate both, but goals are finally as good as how they are defined and tracked for achievement to create a momentum for high performance. Organisations undoubtedly need a functional ecosystem for delivering high performance, other than the processes for planning, and this can be marred by several cultural impediments. These are often patterns and behaviours that have been normalised, but can very significantly erode the opportunities for delivering performance. See if these resonate:

1) MAFA (or mistaking activity for achievement) is a common illusion of creating an artificial buzz for actions that may not necessarily have meaningful outcomes or results. Creating busyness leading to a belief that those who are busiest are contributing best.

2) Micromanaging teams is another quick way of eroding both productivity and ownership for performance. While the manager believes the team is being controlled for productivity, this behaviour reduces performance and engagement to contribute leaving the ownership for performance with the manager.

3) Doing the same things the same way every year but expecting new results. Fixed mindsets and legacy thinking can significantly reduce momentum for high performance. Pet theories and repeated formulas for success are at peril in these times of upheavals.

4) Thinker/ doer divide — imagining only people at the top of the hierarchy will make the right decisions. Authority bias and not empowering those closest to the problem to solve them, can slow down speed for solving problems and performance. 

5) Leadership style plays a serious role in protecting productivity. ‘Funnel’ leaders throw confusions, changes, upheavals at the team, disrupting focus for performance and creating interpersonal challenges that can become a distraction. ‘Umbrella’ leaders guard teams’ focus and attention to performance, managing the distractions in the ecosystem to not lose momentum.

6) Inability to create psychological Safety for candour, conversations, integrating perspectives and team relationships can erode value, energies for problem solving and innovation. Creating a culture for candour can improve performance and reduce time spent in resolving costly mistakes. Valuing employee voice builds self-esteem for contributions, and builds culture as a key differentiator for high performance.

_{This article was featured on The Times of India on August 16th, 2023}