Whether we like it or not goals help us and others to get stuff done.  The business world knows this and is getting on with it, but the Christian world is struggling.  I believe there are two main reasons for this.  The first is a proper reluctance to take responsibility for things that God alone is truly responsible for.  Of course we need to understand our place, however there is still a lot that God has given us stewardship over and setting goals in these areas is very useful.  Second, we have experienced goals used badly and have wrongly concluded that all such targets are bad.

A few years ago I cam across some helpful pointers from Marcus Buckingham when it comes to goals:

• Effective goal-setting drives high performance
• Too many goals = no goals at all
• Goals should set the outcome, not manage the process
• Goals should be SMART
• Set appropriate intervals for the team
• Team goals should be aligned to the organisational goals
• Create goals that play to the strengths of the individual

For those who haven’t come across it before, SMART goals are ones that are:

• Specific
• Measurable
• Achievable
• Relevant
• Time-bound

There are actually quite a few different versions of the above, see the Wikipedia page for more details.

As a leader, do you need to review how you set goals?  Perhaps you need start experimenting with doing things in a different way.

Getting from here to there can often seem like too big a journey; the eventual goal seems so far off that it is difficult to know where to start.  Over the past years in the organisation that I am a part of we have seen a huge amount of progress as a result of tweaking.  This might seem like a strange thing to say, or even that there is not a lot of evidence to show that it is successful.  However, this way of operating is also known as Kaizen, which is Japanese for ‘improving’ or ‘change for the better’ a methodology which focuses on continual improvement.

Kaizen is perhaps most famously a part of the operating system used by Toyota which has enabled them to become the world’s biggest car manufacturer.  Others use it too, and not just in the automotive industry.  For more information about Kaizen see the Wikipedia entry.

For us is has meant continually tweaking everything that we do.  Examples include constant, but relatively small, upgrades to our technology and the introduction of checklists and other changes in work flows.  Though these things might not seem like much, as we look back we realise the huge progress that we have made.

For this approach to work it is important to understand two key things.  First, constant reflection and analysis are required.  If we are not able to be critical in evaluating what we are doing, then we will never identify ways that we can do it better.  Second, the mantra of ‘if it ani’t broke, don’t fix it’ is the enemy of excellence.  Something might not be broken, but that doesn’t mean that it can’t be made better.  The only time you should not fix something is if it cannot be made any better.

A similar, but not identical, idea to this comes from Jim Collins in his book Great by Choice and mentioned in this post.  In looking at those companies who succeeded even in uncertain times, one common theme he saw emerging was that they took disciplined steps forward; never over-stretching themselves, but never under-stretching either.  He named the concept the 20-mile march after the approach taken by Amundsen in racing for the South Pole.  Whatever the weather, and in contrast to Scott’s team, he and his team did 20 miles each day, no more and no less.

Are you daunted by the task in front of you or does the goal seem too far away?  If so, start out 20-mile marching, continually tweaking and improving and you will get there sooner than you think.

The concept of situational leadership has been around for some time and states that a leader needs to lead in different ways depending on the circumstances.  It is something that we probably all know in theory, but pay too little attention to in practice.  The traditional way of thinking about the variation of style is by considering points along a continuum between high and low control.

A study by the Harvard Business Review, and described here by Robyn Benincasa on the Fast Company blog, went beyond the theory and looked at what happened in practice.  A 3 year study of over 3,000 managers found that management style can make a huge difference in the profitability of the company.  They were also able to uncover 6 distinct styles of leadership and reflect upon their effect.  Here is the summary:

1. Pacesetting leader – expects and models excellence
2. Authoritative leader – mobilizes towards a goal with flexibility in the route taken to get there
3. Affiliative leader – builds bonds between people and a sense of belonging
4. Coaching leader – develops people
5. Coercive leader – demands immediate compliance
6. Democratic leader – builds consensus through participation

How easy do you find it to switch between styles and match your leadership to the situation?