On Tuesday, Feb. 11, at 11 a.m. ET/8 a.m. PT, we’ll talk about setting and executing against goals.
This chat took place on Feb. 11, 2020. Download the transcript.
At the start of a new year, setting goals — personal and professional — may very well be top of mind. In business, there are acronyms aimed at helping us set the kinds of goals that can be achieved with reasonable effort. (You’ve probably heard of SMART goals, but if you haven’t considered FAST ones, check out the suggested article below.) Typically, teams gather for offsite meetings, leadership teams set short- and long-term strategic priorities, and companies award annual bonuses when targets are met.
We’d like to hear from you about what works — and what doesn’t — about the way you set goals at work. Given that there’s no single best practice for identifying key targets, operationalizing advancement toward desired outcomes, or measuring the impact of those efforts, we’d like to talk about the approaches you find work best.
We hope you’ll join us Tuesday, Feb. 11, for this conversation.
Questions we’ll discuss include the following:
- How do you approach goal setting at work?
- What’s good (and bad) about the approach?
- How far into the future do you, your teammates, and your organization’s leadership plan goals?
- Do you follow any particular methodology or rubric when it comes to goal setting?
- When and how do you measure your performance against your goals?
In advance of this chat, consider reviewing the following content from MIT SMR:
MIT Sloan’s Donald Sull and Charles Sull argue that goals should be frequently discussed, ambitious, specific, and transparent.
Author and Kleiner Perkins chairman John Doerr discusses key benefits of objectives and key results (OKRs) for metrics-driven organizations.
Research scientist Jeanne Ross from MIT’s Center for Information Systems Research observes that failing to meet goals is normal, but a more constructive process might be to generate and test hypotheses.