John ,
In the situations where I have used impossible goals, we set such goals as
perfect quality. (no rejects produced). We measured the process results in
terms of quality as deviation from perfect using Shewart charts (X bar & R
and attribute charts)
We recognized those who made measurable progress toward the goal. When
people can see progress they respond well even though the end looks
impossible.
At Motorola, Bob Galvin set his whole organization to improving to a level
of 3 errors per million with a simple mission "Six Sigma customer
service". Many if not most felt that was crazy but they worked at it and
many areas met that level. There was a requirement to measure the results
so they knew if they were making progress.
The key is NO reprimand for failure. If reprimand exists goals will be
padded to avoid failure, stretch or not. If there is no base measure as is
often the case the goals are based on feelings that makesthem useless for
improving system performance.
In most management systems in the US failure to meet the goal results in
censure of some kind. Numerical goals may cause people to achieve to the
goal but the goals very often far less than can actually be achieved.
Because people fear censure for not meeting the goal they accept only
goals they believe are achievable.
Most places using stretch goals do not have a decent measured base to know
if the goal is attainable or not so hey accept agreed upon targets or
management imposed judgmental targets. Both limit achievement.
When we use a valid measured base we need only establish the direction for
improvement and time lines for reporting progress. That avoids capping
performance with a goal. When we set goals we either cap performance or
stifle performance.
It works better to set direction and measure progress toward perfection.
Christ did that and millions have been trying to emulate the direction he
set for 2000 years.
Toyota did it too. "No car shall be returned for warranty." Thousands
have been striving for that goal for 40 years and the thousands of
intermediate goals and direction of improvement it spawned. They are down
to 7/10,000 and turned a whole industry up siede down through their
pursuit of an ideal goal. However the company culture has to be right to
make it work.
side team that improved space required by 75%
et
At 11:03 AM 5/7/99 -0500, you wrote:
>Eugene, I'm not trying to be picky here -- just provide useful
>information. I'd be willing to bet (because the empirical evidence is
>pretty strong) that what you called an "impossible goal" would turn out to
>be (if you asked the people working toward them) goals that they only felt
>about 50% confident that they could reach. People think such goals are
>"impossible" or "stretch" goals. Goals that people feel less than 50%
>confidence in reaching soon become quite demotivating.
Eugene Taurman
interLinx Consulting
414-242-3345
http://www/execpc.com/~ilx
If a company values anything more than its' customer, it will lose the
customer.
The irony of that, if it is profitability, market share, security, teams,
learning or philanthropy that it values more it will lose the opportunity
for these too.
--Eugene Taurman <ilx@execpc.com>
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>