Comments on: Do Personal Goals Have a Dangerous Side?

By: Ouida Vincent

Ouida Vincent — Fri, 08 May 2009 18:45:50 +0000

This is a great article that points out that goals have to be guided by vision. Attaining the goal for the sake of the goal will leave the goal achiever weak and with a sense of disillusion…wondering at the end of the day what the sacrifice was for.

By: Do You Dave Ramsey?

Do You Dave Ramsey? — Sat, 02 May 2009 17:01:22 +0000

So very true Trent… without trying to sound like a shameless plug, I’d encourage you and your readers to check out my recent 10 part series on goals.

I use a balance scorecard approach that is designed to dampen the risk of chasing one goal front too aggresively.

Life is multi-faceted and so too should be our goal structure.

Take a couple mins and check it out then let me know what you think!

Thanks!!
Dave

http://doyoudaveramsey.com/goal-setting-man-full/

By: Bella

Bella — Sat, 02 May 2009 03:36:17 +0000

Another important thing: setting a goal is important and has to view all aspects of it’s achievemet. Let me explain. 29% of the market, 29% of sold cars for one or several years can be achieved with or without profit!!! If you set a goal, make sure to set all sides of it accordingly. If you want to have a 1 000 000$ a year of business, make sure you focus on having 100 000 or 200 000$ profits. You probably won’t be happy with 1M$ business, and 1,5M$ expensess.
As the old saying goes: beware what you wish for!

By: Patrick Amato

Patrick Amato — Fri, 01 May 2009 01:37:16 +0000

Great article Trent.

I suspect it may be ok to have just one goal, even for a company. The book “Good to Great” by Collins seems to indicate a single goal is a marker of success (he calls it the hedgehog principal).

Their goal seems to be a bad one (as others mentioned). They could have reached 29% market share by giving away cars. Presumably they had related goals or assumptions (such as making a profit on a car).

This translates well to ones personal life – particularly when a stated goal is to be financially independent. Most of us could do that now by quitting our jobs and using our savings to live in poverty in the streets. Of course the quality of life would be terrible but the goal would be met.

Patrick_C, I think, hit the nail on the head. Obtaining 29% market share was (or should have been) an intermediate objective to some more worth while goal.

This lesson translate well to personal finance in my opinion- goals should never be about the dollars but something that does good while causing minimum harm. Trent’s articles really resonate with me because they almost always connect a financial step with his worthwhile objectives in an eloquent way.

Certainly, it

By: DONNA

DONNA — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 14:53:30 +0000

I thought this was a great post……..goals should be balanced.

By: OAB

OAB — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 14:10:05 +0000

This is the first time I’ve felt compelled to comment here. The line “They set a long term goal, but they used short term tactics to get there” really struck a chord with me. I really need to evaluate not only my goals but the strategies I employ to get there.

Fantastic blog entry.

By: joan

joan — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 12:18:57 +0000

Trent: You have a great way with words. I like the way you compare goals with climbing a tree. As an ex-tomboy who has raised 4 boys, this really made the right impression. I’m really looking forward to your next book. Are you in the process of writing another book?

By: Celia

Celia — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 02:42:12 +0000

I’d say this is something that I’ve been struggling with for a long time–it took me awhile to get away from extremes and understand this kind of goal setting sustainability, and I still forget sometimes. Thanks for a succinct reminder.

By: Mr. Nickle

Mr. Nickle — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 00:02:50 +0000

This is a great article, and it makes a point I’ve never run across before.

This is going to help me think through my choices on a big decision I’ve been wrestling with lately.

Thanks!

By: todo es bien

todo es bien — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 23:26:08 +0000

I see this often @ the company where I work. (A Fortune 10 Company). The challenge is that often the ostensible goal does not match the ultimate outcome desired. For instance, in the GM example, the goal would have needed to include parameters around profit margins and other variables to make any sense. Unfortunately, a badge that said “29 and maintain margins” would be onerous.
I have a goal of losing 20 pounds. Cutting off my leg to do so would probably accomplish it, but I suspect I would be less than thrilled with the result.
What you most frequently notice is people quite naturally managing towards the metrics that will make them a bonus at the expense of other qualities. The people who establish the metrics are often daft. They often build the metrics with no cognizance of the ramifications. One thing I know, if you set a metric for performance and it does not map in the real world to the outcome you desire you are in for a heap of trouble. AND, it is MUCH HARDER TO PROPERLY SET METRICS than anyone would guess.

By: Jim

Jim — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 22:18:53 +0000

Goals are important and necessary. Without goals we’re simply wandering aimlessly.

But a goal alone isn’t going to get you what you need. You have to do the right things and make the right choices in order to hit your goal.

So for GM’s sake, the goal in question isn’t whats to blame. What GM did to try to hit their goal was the problem.

By: Luke

Luke — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 18:59:03 +0000

This article really spoke to me today as my wife and I struggle to pay off our remaining debt. We’ve been at it for so long, and have sacrificed so much, that we have sort of grown to resent that debt snowball plan.

My vehicle is falling apart, our furniture is broken, our retirement funds are way behind, and we don’t have adequate savings for our children’s college years.

If we continue on the same track, once we hit debt freedom we’ll be scrambling to replace the car and the sofa, and will be trying to play catch up with retirement and college savings.

By: Art

Art — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 18:52:55 +0000

Regarding GM losing marketshare to Toyota, note that Toyota loses thousands of dollars on every Prius it sells. Toyota’s losses were only offest by their (gas guzzling) truck and SUV sales.

And regarding the Prius, please take the time to read this article in its entirety.
http://www.seattleweekly.com/2009-04-22/news/the-flip-side-of-the-perfect-prius/

By: Kris

Kris — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 18:41:37 +0000

I have to agree with Steven (#5). There is a dangerous side to goals, but without them, we wouldn’t get anywhere. Humans crave self-improvement, and some goals require a little blindness and audacity.

By: Studenomist

Studenomist — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 18:34:09 +0000

The problem is that we are all motivated to strive for the stars but so few of us are realistic with our goals. I know that my blog will never be a top blog but I would be happy if I could have a 1000 followers because that would mean that 1000 people care about what I have to say.

By: the Dad

the Dad — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 18:25:28 +0000

Exactly what I needed to hear today.

Thanks, Trent.

By: Mike C

Mike C — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 18:20:12 +0000

Motorola did exactly the same thing. They set a goal to be market leader in the cell phone business by the end of 2006. Instead, their cell phone business started losing money, to the point of dragging down the rest of the company into the red; instead of becoming market leader they slowly started going down to 3rd, 4th…

By: Baker @ ManVsDebt

Baker @ ManVsDebt — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 18:01:04 +0000

I have a tendency to go at goals blindly from time to time.

I’m super passionate about debt reduction, but so far have done a decent job at maintaining balance. I thought this way a fantastic recap of what many people struggle with on a daily basis!

By: DebtGoal

DebtGoal — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 17:57:57 +0000

The problem is not setting goals, but rather choosing the correct ones. A narrow goal that sets a target number is meaningless unless the goal setter has a basic strategy in place – and that strategy needs to be systematically evaluated on a periodic basis, such as the end of each month.

By: PMC

PMC — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 17:28:19 +0000

Trent,
I also disagree with the BG. The problem isn´t in laying out big goals. GM´s goal was a vision to inspire the company. However, it appears that poor planning led them away from the prize.
Great post!