[afarrell]

All of these present problems in different contexts

Specific: This assumes that the picture you currently have of what you want is the thing you actually want. Do you want faster horse, a Model T, or swift reliable transportation of a form you've not yet imagined.

Measurable: If you only value that which has a number, you'll lose sight of what truly matters in life because of the Streetlight Effect[1]. Consider the ridiculousness of the question "What NPS score would your children give you?"

Attainable: There is a limit to the degree to which you can "be sure" of anything, especially without 2020 vision.

Relevant: This requires really knowing what your values are so that you can practice the subtle art of not giving a fuck[2] about other things. Determining those can be hard emotionally-painful work, but in any context it is a good problem you want to have solved.

Time Bound: Sometimes deadlines spur action, sometimes they paralyse or cause you to lose sleep. Sometimes, they are so far off in the future that you don't think about them until it is too late because you thought you could do them. If you're looking at a timescale longer than 6 weeks, consider instead that you might want a CGP-Grey style Theme: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NVGuFdX5guE

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streetlight_effect

[2] https://www.audible.co.uk/pd/The-Subtle-Art-of-Not-Giving-a-... Highly recommend this to anyone who spends lots of time thinking about personal goal-setting.

[munificent]

I think you're assuming that long-term goals can't change. Just because I have a goal to do X in ten years, that doesn't mean I am forcibly committed to reaching X even if I no longer want to.

Let's say I have a vague dream of becoming a sailor. Consider these four scenarios:

- Scenario A: I make it an explicit goal. In year 1, I read some books, take a sailing class, and forgo some luxuries to start saving up for a boat. In year 2, I buy a boat and sail. Dream attained!

- Scenario B: I make no goal. In the absence of a concrete goal, I don't read or save in year 1. In year 2, I still long to sail but am no closer to getting there. Eventually I run out the clock on my life.

- Scenario C: I make it an explicit goal. In year 1, I read some books, take a sailing class, and forgo some luxuries to start saving up for a boat. In year 2, I decide I am no longer interested in sailing. I remove that long-term goal, and spend the money I saved on something else.

- Scenario D: I make no goal. In the absence of a concrete goal, I don't read or save in year 1. In year 2, I lose interest in sailing. Nothing gained, nothing lost.

The two failure modes are B and C. If you fail to pursue a long-term goal that doesn't change (B), you are eternally unfulfilled. If you pursue a dream that changes before you reach it (C), you have some lost opportunity cost for the work you put into that dream that is now not relevant.

For most people, the latter is a much smaller harm than the former. It's more rewarding to strive towards something meaningful even if it ends up not panning out than to abandon your dreams pre-emptively.

Of course, the ideal is A or D, but none of us have a time machine to determine who our future selves will become. So the only choice you can make today is A/C or B/D.

[cuddlybacon]

I think the problem with long term goals is not that your preferences may change but you don't update your goals. I think the problem is procrastination.

Consider this variation of your Scenario A: You make explicit goals to read 3 relevant books, take a sailing class, and save $10,000 for a boat. You find yourself in mid October having only read 1 book and saved up $2000. You end up not sailing until year 4 even though year 2 was certainly achievable.

A better variation of Scenario A: Breaking the big goal into smaller ones can prevent this type of procrastination. Instead of save $10000 by end of year, make 26 goals to save $385 every payday. Then make a goal to sign up for the sailing classes by June. Then based on that June date, decide to read book 1 by Feb 28, book two by April 30, and book 3 by June 30.

In the second variation, I assert you'd be much less likely to procrastinate to the point that your year end goal becomes unachievable.

Perhaps you assumed in Scenarios A and C would do that. Your post would make more sense that way. But I find most people do not do any breakdown. They'd just set the end of year results as the goal the reach a point where they realize it is impossible to achieve any of it.

[johncessna]

>"If you only value that which has a number, you'll lose sight of what truly matters in life because of the Streetlight Effect[1]"

I don't think that's the intent. The intent is to look back and see if you accomplished your goal or not. If you don't have a measurement, then you don't know if you've meet your goal. Something such as 'I want to be a good parent to my kid' Isn't specific, nor is it attainable. Setting a goal of 'I want to spend an hour of time a day with my child' is both specific and measurable.

>" Sometimes, they are so far off in the future that you don't think about them until it is too late because you thought you could do them."

Seems like the contradicts the 'Relevant' part of SMART.

I see this as a framework to help you focus in on your goal instead of making wishes at the start of ever new year. 'I'm going to lose weight this year' Okay, how are you going to do that? Are you going to exercise and eat less? Okay, how much or both and how will you know if you met those micro goals? Given what we know about weight loss at the moment, what's a reasonable goal weight for March, June, August?

[Jtsummers]

> 'I'm going to loose weight this year' Okay, how are you going to do that?

About this goal specifically, I found it beneficial to stop thinking about a target weight. Instead think about: What level of fitness do I want? What kind of health do I want? (the two are related, but not the same)

Main reason: If you take up exercise and are not obese or at the higher end of "overweight", you may not lose weight for the first couple of months (or ever!) depending on the style of exercise you've selected and your body's tendency to build muscle. If you take up weightlifting, and are overweight but not obese, you could see your body composition basically trade, nearly pound for pound, fat for muscle. You will look better and feel better but not achieve the weight goal, which can be disheartening to people who have an explicit weight goal even though what they've done has measurably improved their fitness and health. And if you take up running or something similarly cardio intensive, you may gain weight (building up leg and core muscles with running, for instance) in the first few weeks before any weight loss begins. This is similarly disheartening and demotivating.

Instead, think about what fitness or health level you want and why, then work towards them.

My fitness goal was predicated on being able to play back-to-back soccer games (rec league, 70 minute games). So I needed to be able to sustain nearly 2 hours of continuous movement including sprints and extended periods of running/jogging. So I took up running and got my 5k time below 25 minutes, then upped it to 10k runs. A single game left me feeling like I'd just finished a warmup, the second game would leave me feeling like I'd actually exercised but not fatigued.

My health goal was predicated on getting off a statin and reducing my blood pressure (largely work stress induced, but my weight and fitness at the time pushed it into the pre-hypertensive range). So I ate better in order to achieve that, and reduced (not eliminated, still drink coffee black) caffeine in order to improve sleep (both improved sleep and reduced caffeine also helped reduce my anxiety levels and my periodic panic attacks at the time left me, happy side effect).

Both of those left me at a lower weight than I started at, but I had no explicit weight target. If I had, I could've been demotivated by early weight gains (when I started running I went from 215 to 220lbs) or later weight gains (when I added BJJ to my exercise regimen I went from 175 to 190). Both of those were the result of increased muscle mass, but they both took me in the "wrong" direction if weight loss and a weight target were specific goals.

[PaulDavisThe1st]

Coming at this from opposite direction as you, I nevertheless wholeheartedly agree.

I've spent large chunks of my life as an extremely fit ultra-endurance athlete. I've done events that other ultra-endurance athletes called "insane". I wasn't at the front of the pack, but I was at the front of the middle of the pack.

These days, I'm not interested in racing. I'm not even interested in training. But if I do think about "fitness" or "health" goals, it's definitely structured around what I'd like to be able to do, rather than specifics of my body.

For example, one standing goal I've had for a long time is to remain fit enough be able to go out and run a half-marathon more or less on a whim, and still finish in 1:45 or less without hurting too much.

More recently, having moved to 6000' as a home elevation, as well as being very sedentary from work/life stuff, I'd like to be able to keep up runs uphill without stopping, regardless of the pace I'm moving at (currently impossible).

I think structuring things around "what I want to be able to do, and how I want to feel after I do them" is an excellent framework, and far better than "lose N pounds" or "cut X minutes off my time for Y".

[Jtsummers]

I'm also living at a higher altitude (moved to CO last year) and our house is at 7k feet, it's changed my objectives as well. I doubt I can get back to 25 minute 5k runs anytime soon, but I would like to get back to 5k runs and completing them without having to stop. Good luck to you and your uphill battle.

[serverholic]

> Something such as 'I want to be a good parent to my kid' Isn't specific, nor is it attainable. Setting a goal of 'I want to spend an hour of time a day with my child' is both specific and measurable.

There are so many factors that play into being a good father that "I want to spend an hour of time a day with my child" is essentially useless.

[johncessna]

I'm sorry. I didn't mean that to be an exhaustive list of how to be a good parent. It was meant to be an example of specific and measurable sub goal on the path to what someone feels leads to being a good father.

It's off topic, but you seem to have some insight into this. What steps would you take to achieve a goal like that?

[afarrell]

> I don't think that's the intend

Indeed, it is a possible unintended consequence if you're not reasonably aware of that risk.

[jolmg]

> There is a limit to the degree to which you can "be sure" of anything, especially without 2020 vision.

Ha! Is that an intended reference to the year 2020? That's a great double entendre.

[nullsense]

As a side note I think that expression will need to come with a trigger warning in future.

[TeMPOraL]

It's a reference to how Americans rate vision; 20/20 is considered normal, good visual acuity.

But I guess it works if read as a year too.

[jolmg]

Yeah, normally I see it written as 20-20 or 20/20, never 2020. That's why I thought it was meant to be read both ways. Pretty good, I think.

[afarrell]

Yes. I intend both meanings simultaneously.

[kritiko]

All great points. Is there any research that SMART goals work or are they just a management fad / anecdotally useful?

[lbotos]

The point of SMART is that it's a framework to help you communicate your goals. They are often used in management because if someone says "i wanna build x" you and that person may have a different definition of what that means. If you agree on specifics and how you will measure done you've clearly communicated.

If you can't communicate what you will deliver and by when how can someone know if you've done what you've set out to do?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goal#Goal_setting covers some empirical research.

For example, 'purpose' can be nebulous, but a goal should be reasonably specific.

[afarrell]

yea. SMART is a tool with flaws that are more or less relevant in different contexts. Being aware of the flaws helps you use the tool better and helps you decide when to choose a different tool.