Volume 6 Number 4
October 2010
We’ve all been taught that setting goals is a good thing: that they drive performance and motivation. What if that’s only part of the story?
Researchers in human change theory and adult learning theory have looked at two types of goals: performance-outcome goals and learning goals. Performance-outcome goals are the ones that we most generally see in organizations. Learning goals are much rarer. That’s unfortunate.
Learning goals help focus our attention on the skills and knowledge that we need to build in order to reach our goals. Learning goals build capacity and capability. For example, a few years ago, a client of mine wanted their consultants to be able to tap into vertical markets. This was brand new to the consultants and only a few of them had experience with it. Initially, the senior manager wanted to charge the consultants with the goal of penetrating two vertical markets by the end of the year.
My question to the senior manager (and I’ve used versions of this countless times) was this: “Are you certain that the consultants have the skills and knowledge to do what you are asking them to do?”
After a very brief pause, he admitted that they didn’t. I proposed that we help the consultants build to the outcome that he desired. The goal was re-framed into a learning goal that each consultant tweaked somewhat to best fit them. Essentially, however, the goal became, “By the end of this quarter, I will have identified what it is I need to learn in order to penetrate vertical markets, and I will have identified resources to help me build my skill in that area.”
The result was a sense of excitement, learning, brainstorming and collaboration. Learning goals breed this sort of excitement. Performance-outcome goals breed anxiety; and, ironically, they often lead to a decrease in performance.
Are performance-outcome goals always bad?
Absolutely not! When the goal is very straightforward and when the employee possesses the skills, knowledge and resources that they need in order to pursue the goal, performance-outcome goals can produce motivation. But only when those criterial are met.
In goal-setting for employees, the essential question for managers to ask is this:
Does the employee have the requisite skills, knowledge or resources to do what I’m asking her to do? If she does not, a learning goal is in order. If she does possess these things, then a performance-outcome goal is in order.
Never underestimate the power of the performance that can be achieved when space is allowed for learning and practice – without the immediate pressure of performance expectations. The following is an example from Mindset: The New Psychology of Success, by Carol Dweck, Ph.D. As a baseball fan, I was fascinated by the example. Ty Cobb once said that the reason Babe Ruth developed into such a good hitter is that he started his career as a pitcher, and nobody expects a pitcher to hit well. Accordingly to Cobb, this allowed Ruth to practice and learn without expectations ruining him or his motivation. I’m not enough of a baseball historian to know if Cobb was right, but it is interesting to ponder what it could do for our own teams . . .
About the Author
Bobbi Kahler is a leadership development specialist. She guides leaders to renew and grow their existing talent, turning latent potential into high-powered performance. Her core expertise is turning the science of human performance into practical approaches that leaders can use to achieve results.
Bobbi has been developing human performance for more than 20 years. In addition to her practical experience, she has her Master’s degree from Case Western where she studied the science of human performance. Her latest book, Travels of the Heart: Developing Your Inner Leader was released in March 2010. She speaks on leadership throughout the U.S. including leadership work that she does with high school and college students. She can be reached at bobbi@bobbikahler.com.