SMART goals in project planning and performance management

From apppm
(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(→‎Limitations)
(→‎Limitations)
Line 190: Line 190:
  
 
Another aspect that encounters the successful execution of the SMART goals setting technique is based on human resistance<ref name="Management Review" />. The roots for a fruitless implementation can be both the human nature or the tool itself. The latter will be discussed as part of the tool specific limitations.
 
Another aspect that encounters the successful execution of the SMART goals setting technique is based on human resistance<ref name="Management Review" />. The roots for a fruitless implementation can be both the human nature or the tool itself. The latter will be discussed as part of the tool specific limitations.
−
Regarding the former, seemingly unrelated individual human anxiety about the outcome of the goal setting can hinder to achieve any positive result. This - in the context of change management - phrased phenomenon ''resistance to change''<ref name="change">John Hayes, ''The theory and practice of change management'', 2014</ref> can arise among others due to self-interest of the affected, who has no desire to adapt to a new goal or due to the individual belief of missing capabilities after a goal has been established. The latter is closely related to the expectancy model of motivation<ref name="expectancy">V.H. Vroom, ''Work and motivation'', 1964</ref>.
+
Regarding the former, seemingly unrelated individual human anxiety about the outcome of the goal setting can hinder to achieve any positive result. This - in the context of change management - phrased phenomenon ''resistance to change''<ref name="change">John Hayes, ''The theory and practice of change management'', 2014</ref> can arise among others due to self-interest of the affected, who has no desire to adapt to a new goal, or due to the individual belief of missing capabilities after a goal has been established. The latter is closely related to the expectancy model of motivation<ref name="expectancy">V.H. Vroom, ''Work and motivation'', 1964</ref>.
  
 
Considering model specific attributes, SMART goals do not ensure appropriate goal setting, meaning that it rather puts emphasise on the ability to phrase goals, but not to determine whether these are valuable<ref name="wellknown" />. However, Doran<ref name="Management Review" /> identified the general complexity in setting appropriate goals in a dynamic environment. Moreover, it is argued that it is not applicable to goals in the long run as wells as lacks flexibility. This argument is closely related to the fact of a dynamic business environment and that the tool does not offer natural capabilities to bypass this circumstance. Furthermore, it is claimed that the technique lacks the spirit of exigency and of creativity and rather supports lethargy. Setting low goals is another critique of the tool. Resulting from a strong insistence on a trait like ''achievable'', higher and more optimistic goals potentially leading to greater performance are disregarded<ref name="wellknown" />.
 
Considering model specific attributes, SMART goals do not ensure appropriate goal setting, meaning that it rather puts emphasise on the ability to phrase goals, but not to determine whether these are valuable<ref name="wellknown" />. However, Doran<ref name="Management Review" /> identified the general complexity in setting appropriate goals in a dynamic environment. Moreover, it is argued that it is not applicable to goals in the long run as wells as lacks flexibility. This argument is closely related to the fact of a dynamic business environment and that the tool does not offer natural capabilities to bypass this circumstance. Furthermore, it is claimed that the technique lacks the spirit of exigency and of creativity and rather supports lethargy. Setting low goals is another critique of the tool. Resulting from a strong insistence on a trait like ''achievable'', higher and more optimistic goals potentially leading to greater performance are disregarded<ref name="wellknown" />.

Revision as of 10:50, 30 September 2017

Effective goal setting can encounter many obstacles such as lacking organisational capabilities or resistance to change, e.g due to individual anxiety. Hence, creating and implementing appropriate goals seem to be challenging. Including the dynamic environmentHence, establishing effective goals followed by developed action plans is of great importance in any project management process In a dynamic company environment. Initially created by George T. Doran in the Management Review[1], the SMART goals can be classified as an effective goal setting technique. The acronym SMART stands for: Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, Time bound.

Being in line with the purpose perspective of projects, this goal setting method is not only applicable in professional projects, but also in any project of private nature. Using this tool allows to generate success substantially related to its original efforts, which is of high value for any project manager. Especially, its great value in the planning phase and performance management make a further investigation necessary while representing its tool-specific limits and setting it in comparison to similar tools. Understanding its possible advantages and the ability to apply it using a guidance with case studies allow a valid conclusion about its value in the context of the project planning and performance management.

Contents

Introduction to goal setting

Starting in the 1960's with the studies conducted in the area of organisational performance, Dr. Edwin Locke established 1968 the conclusion that setting goals results in great organisational performance[2]. Followed by George T. Doran in the Management Review[1], the study extended to the recognition that unclear goal settings in companies hindered a continuous progress within the organisation.

As stated in the Standard for Project Management[3], goals are defined outcomes and benefits specifying the expected result of a project. They can be short term and long term, and are translated from an overall vision. Hence, goals are set after the scope of a project, program or portfolio has been developed and are further described in the planning phase, the 2nd stage of the project management process[4]. Goals are used throughout the project management process to track achievements and to measure the performance, which are important in the Program Governance process. Next to the performance evaluation of the proposed goals, goals create a direction[1] which allows to be followed throughout the phases of any project management process[4]. As any managerial task such as a planning process is accompanied by uncertainties[5] that can lead to ambiguity and fallacy, an effective way of setting achievable goals is absolutely essential to mitigate negative outcomes.

Next to the findings of Doran[1] and the Standard for Project Management[3], further experimental research accomplished by Locke and Latham (2002)[6] prove that setting goals increases both motivation of the affected, achievements and success rates in different areas. Lastly, it provides accountability for the completion of a project[7].

Big Idea SMART goals and benefits

Due to the importance of an effective goal setting technique in the organisational performance management, Doran[1] proposed the SMART goals which acronym stands for:

Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, Time bound.
Figure 1: SMART goals[8]

Using this acronym, several variations evolved other time, such as[9]:

  • S for specific, significant, stretching
  • M for measurable, meaningful, motivational
  • A for achievable, attainable, agreed upon, acceptable, action-oriented
  • R for relevant, realistic, reasonable, rewarding, results-oriented
  • T for time bound, time based, timely, tangible, trackable

In the following just the first and most common variations are used.

Studies show that using a tool such as the SMART goals technique is valuable due to its requirement for specificity. Having specific or clear goals, respectively, increases persistence and self efficacy. Moreover, it reduces the influence of individual anxiety and eventually allows[6] outperforming reference groups who did not apply a specific goal setting. The time constraint of SMART goals is also facilitating a fast work pace compared to undefined deadlines[10].

The easy applicability, its level of awareness combined with the positive resonance among users are another reason for the tool's success[11].

In the field of project management SMART goals generate a sense of discipline, structure[12] and focus in the planning phase[13]. Moreover, a higher rate of accomplishment compared to a vague goal setting is ensured, hence, a roadmap to success can be developed. This tool allows to generate success substantially related to its original efforts, which is of high value for any project manager[1]. It reduces ambiguity and increases commitment[14] in a managerial environment, and can be applied to any part of a company whether the project management or the entire company[15] - regardless of the size of the organisation[8]. It can be used to measure and to track project phases and results, and can be implemented in a great amount of methodologies such as Mind mapping[16], WBS, Gantt chart[12] or Balanced scorecard[17]. In terms of performance measurement, using SMART goals enables developing indicators to analyse the performance compared to its expected outcomes[18] and thus enables feedback and learning[19]. Lastly, an improvement of the team efficiency within a project team is another attitude.

Application: How to be SMART?

After the project scope has been defined, SMART goals are implemented[16]. Thus, implementing it in the planning phase is the obvious choice. Because of its great scope of application possibilities, SMART goals can be utilised throughout the project management process[11]. However, the main aspects of application in project management are planning, performance management and monitoring[19].

Before applying the tool on a specific case, three criteria need to be considered[20]:

  1. A clear linkage between set goals and the company's strategic goals is necessary to ensure commitment and motivation of affected employees.
  2. Following a hierarchical and clear goal setting approach is essential, i.e. strategic goals have to be determined before any tactical or operational goal setting can happen. Establishing goals on an operational level with prior defined strategic goals can promote higher performance as an understanding of task achievements in comparison to company goals takes place.
  3. The ability to create measurable goals is unalterable as it is substantial for generating performance measuring indicators to evaluate the success of the goals within the project.

Guidance

A typical application environment can be a workshop[21], more commonly used are simple Microsoft Excel Spreadsheets.

The following guidance along the acronym of SMART shows how to implement the tool using an example of a shoe manufacturer by answering the questions of the subcategories below.

Specific:

The goals should be well-defined and precise to avoid any misinterpretation, keeping it simple is also important to increase people's understanding. Following W-questions could be asked to define this criteria.

Table 1: Specific
Question Answer
What do I want? Develop a more comfortable shoe
Why is it important? To sustain on the market
Who is involved? Marketing, R&D
Where is it located? Northern Europe
Which resources? Financial, human, patents

Measurable:

It is important to develop at this stage measures to quantify the progress of the goal, such as indicators. The type of measuring as well as the desired measurement values are of interest.

Table 2: Measurable
Question Answer
How do I measure (quality of shoes)? Test results of prototypes, customer experience measured quantitatively with qualitative aspects - additional aspect: cost and price consideration essential

It represents a crucial part of the goal setting as it strongly influences the project flow. Trends show a numerical illustration is supportive to compare goal results[12] - if necessary translating qualitative statements into numeric values needs to be considered.

Achievable:

The feasibility of the goal is investigated, moreover assigning the goals to responsible people ensures accountability.

Table 3: Achievable
Question Answer
How can I attain the goal? If necessary internal resources are available and market offers opportunity
How realistic, considering internal capabilities? Financial, R&D, manufacturing resources are available

This corresponds to capabilities, where the difficulty is to determine goals that challenge, but not overcharge available capabilities.

Relevant:

At this stage the goal needs to be evaluated considering its individual and organisational relevance. By answering the below questions positively the relevance of developed goals is taken into account.

Table 4: Relevant
Question Answer
Is it worthwhile? Yes
Is it the right moment? Yes
Does it fit to my needs? Yes
Are we the right company? Yes
Does the current external circumstances allow it? Yes

Moreover, it ensures higher commitment to achieve the goal if a clear relevance is identifiable. In case that the relevance of set goals is not given, the overall engagement during the goal achievement process can abate[6].

Time bound:

Lastly, deadlines and frequent status updates need to be defined.

Table 5: Time bound
Question Answer
When are the deadlines? As it is a summer shoe, we need to meet the goal for the next season and develop milestone meetings.
What do I expect in the short run, long run? First draft in four weeks, first prototype in three months, SOP (Start of production) in one year

Precise deadlines are important to avoid displacing the project process. The shorter the time frame - considering realistic capabilities - the better.

Case study: Budgeting[14]

The purpose of briefly illustrating the case study is to show how significant the changes can be after implementing the SMART goals technique into project processes.

Both scenarios took place within an big, international corporation with a small corporate unit and flat hierarchy inside the organisation. One key aspect in the company was the annual budget and objective setting between corporate and business units. One unit applied SMART goals setting, another particular unit did not apply any effective goal setting approach.


Outcomes

The outcomes of this case study are shortly illustrated in figure 2:

Figure 2: Outcomes of SMART goals implementation [22]

The case study shows that next to the positive outcomes of SMART goals mainly the two project management processes come into play - project planning and performance management[4]. Calculating the budget represents a significant task in project planning and by measuring the performance of the set goals in the case study the expected outcomes have been checked.

Limitations

Limitations regarding the SMART goals method can be identified. Some exist due to human failure which are applicable to many methods throughout project management, some can be developed due to the method's natural characteristics.

Starting with the former category, the SMART goals setting depends - as similar methods do - on the user's input and perseverance to follow its instructions. Even if the tool was correctly used, choosing, for instance, a specific goal which is negatively influenced by someone's bias can turn good intentions into an unsuccessful story. Other traits of the method can be negatively influenced by the individual bias as well, such as the trait relevant. If the goal's attached degree of relevance has been identified wrongly, this false decision can hinder the goal realisation to prosper. For example, if the goal is based on an incorrect estimation of the demand on the market or the goal's directions are not aligned with the company's strategy. This error regarding the trait relevant is closely related to asymmetric information in the company. Taking this example into consideration, asymmetric information represents one of the major reasons for uncertainty in any managerial task and thus, it is not only relevant considering SMART goals.

Another aspect that encounters the successful execution of the SMART goals setting technique is based on human resistance[1]. The roots for a fruitless implementation can be both the human nature or the tool itself. The latter will be discussed as part of the tool specific limitations. Regarding the former, seemingly unrelated individual human anxiety about the outcome of the goal setting can hinder to achieve any positive result. This - in the context of change management - phrased phenomenon resistance to change[23] can arise among others due to self-interest of the affected, who has no desire to adapt to a new goal, or due to the individual belief of missing capabilities after a goal has been established. The latter is closely related to the expectancy model of motivation[24].

Considering model specific attributes, SMART goals do not ensure appropriate goal setting, meaning that it rather puts emphasise on the ability to phrase goals, but not to determine whether these are valuable[11]. However, Doran[1] identified the general complexity in setting appropriate goals in a dynamic environment. Moreover, it is argued that it is not applicable to goals in the long run as wells as lacks flexibility. This argument is closely related to the fact of a dynamic business environment and that the tool does not offer natural capabilities to bypass this circumstance. Furthermore, it is claimed that the technique lacks the spirit of exigency and of creativity and rather supports lethargy. Setting low goals is another critique of the tool. Resulting from a strong insistence on a trait like achievable, higher and more optimistic goals potentially leading to greater performance are disregarded[11]. Last but not least, the many variations of interpreting the acronym of SMART goals lead to a loss of effectiveness and to misunderstanding[25].

Alternative goal setting methods[26] such as Cascading goals where the hierarchal Top-down approach is essential or Using Percentage Weights with a relative assignment of importance to organisational goals offer possibilities to bypass identified flaws of the SMART goals technique. Nevertheless, these options are also accompanied by negative aspects which do not allow a general applicability regardless of the company's size.

An extension of SMART goals to SMARTER goals[11] including traits like E (evaluated) and R (reviewed) is another way to mitigate potential flaws of the original tool.

Conclusion

As initially stated the SMART goals technique is supposed to be an effective way of achieving specific objectives. The question whether or not SMART goals lead to effectiveness cannot be answered so easily. For many other methods the dependence on external circumstances represents a crucial part whether the applicability is successful or not, same occurs to the SMART technique. However, its purpose and structure lead to proven success and popularity in the industry[11]. In contrary to other methodologies such as Cascading goals[26], it depends less on the organisational structure. Its rather generalist applicability can lead to failure, however, by putting emphasise on its positive guiding and goal structuring attributes its overall success and continuous usage for more than 30 years[1] seems comprehensible. Additionally, the expectance of one size fits all[6], i.e. one tool can be applied to any case, is unrealistic and in general, not applicable to many tools regardless of its purpose. Its structuring, clear and motivating traits are facilitating many goal setting processes[25]. Despite abandoning the tool due to its limits, an inclusion of affected people in the goal development process, regularly updating initial goals in case of changes in the business environment and a precise evaluation of the goals' consequences to avoid a reduction of productivity can reduce potential limits[7]. In order to be successful, a deep understanding of the organisation is required due to its importance throughout the stages of project management[4]. Especially, for the performance management a clear systematic and means of measurement for evaluating performance indicators is necessary[21]. In conclusion, SMART goals in a project management environment have proven to be a valuable tool for a great time. Considering its given limitations by encountering them with proper means can lead to a big achievement while planning a project and later on evaluating its performance.

Annotated bibliography

References

  1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 Management Review, 1981, http://community.mis.temple.edu/mis0855002fall2015/files/2015/10/S.M.A.R.T-Way-Management-Review.pdf, Retrieved September 20, 2017
  2. ↑ Dr. Edwin Locke, Toward a Theory of Task Motivation and Incentives, 1968
  3. ↑ 3.0 3.1 PMI, The Standard for Project Management, 2013, p26-29
  4. ↑ 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.3 PMI, XXX, https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/project-management-middle-five-stages-6969, Retrieved September 20, 2017
  5. ↑ Gareth R. Jones, Essentials of Contemporary Management, 2015, p9
  6. ↑ 6.0 6.1 6.2 6.3 http://hilt.harvard.edu/files/hilt/files/settinggoals.pdf, Retrieved September 20, 2017
  7. ↑ 7.0 7.1 http://www.brighthubpm.com/templates-forms/78835-a-worksheet-for-preparing-smart-goals/, Retrieved September 20, 2017
  8. ↑ 8.0 8.1 Megan M. Flores, 2017, https://www.achieveit.com/resources/blog/history-evolution-smart-goals/, Retrieved September 20, 2017
  9. ↑ https://www.projectsmart.co.uk/smart-goals.php, Retrieved September 20, 2017
  10. ↑ Dr. Edwin Locke & Latham, American Psychologist, 2002
  11. ↑ 11.0 11.1 11.2 11.3 11.4 11.5 https://www.projectsmart.co.uk/brief-history-of-smart-goals.php, Retrieved September 20, 2017
  12. ↑ 12.0 12.1 12.2 http://blog.capterra.com/10-smart-goal-setting-best-practices-for-project-planning/, Retrieved September 20, 2017
  13. ↑ http://hr-mpact.com/Documents/goals_article.pdf, Retrieved September 20, 2017
  14. ↑ 14.0 14.1 https://www.projectsmart.co.uk/smart-goals-reduce-ambiguity-and-increase-commitment.php, Retrieved September 20, 2017
  15. ↑ https://blog.weekdone.com/smart-goals/, Retrieved September 20, 2017
  16. ↑ 16.0 16.1 http://www.brighthubpm.com/project-planning/26374-smart-goals-in-project-management/, Retrieved September 20, 2017
  17. ↑ http://jalt-publications.org/tlt/departments/job-info-centre/articles/1661-smart-goals-and-goal-setting-career-enhancement, Retrieved September 20, 2017
  18. ↑ http://www.kean.edu/sites/default/files/u7/SMART%20Objectives.pdf, Retrieved September 20, 2017
  19. ↑ 19.0 19.1 https://www.projectsmart.co.uk/use-smart-objectives-to-focus-goals-plans-and-performance.php Retrieved September 20, 2017
  20. ↑ https://www.aligned4results.com/consultingtipsandtoolsblog/2008/12/how-to-link-smart-job-objectives-to-strategic-plans/, Retrieved September 20, 2017
  21. ↑ 21.0 21.1 http://www.aligned4results.com/WritingSMARTjobObjectives.html, Retrieved September 20, 2017
  22. ↑ Patrick M. Grimm, Own illustration based on industrial example, 2017
  23. ↑ John Hayes, The theory and practice of change management, 2014
  24. ↑ V.H. Vroom, Work and motivation, 1964
  25. ↑ 25.0 25.1 https://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/smart-goals.htm, Retrieved September 20, 2017
  26. ↑ 26.0 26.1 https://hbr.org/2017/01/3-popular-goal-setting-techniques-managers-should-avoid, Retrieved September 20, 2017
Retrieved from "http://wiki.doing-projects.org/index.php?title=SMART_goals_in_project_planning_and_performance_management&oldid=43137"
Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Toolbox