Carrying on with yesterday's commentary about a recent book review in the Wall Street Journal, the article's author (who also happens to be the book's author) takes on the matter of organizational goal-setting, and what he refers to as "the cult of positivity" in American corporations and setting big, audacious goals.
 
In the article, the author writes that "the pro-goal consensus is starting to crumble," because rigid goals may encourage employees to cut ethical corners in order to achieve these big, audacious goals. Ethical corner-cutting would seem to have more to do with the internal culture of an organization, than the goals themselves. This ethical corner-cutting is more a hallmark of passive-aggressive and cultures than the results of goal-setting.
 
The article goes on to submit that goals may also lead to underachievement, and provides the example of New York cab drivers making less money on rainy days, because they hit their "mental target" (which would be called a "goal") of a good day's earnings, and head home. This isn't really goal underachievement, but actually achievement. If it is anything, it is goal-setting up to a pre-set goal, and not through it to another higher goal.
 
We've all done this. It's been a long, hard day at work, and all we want to do is get home to relax and spend a quiet evening. So, we get home, maybe even have dinner, and then do nothing much until it's time to go to bed. We might even just sleep in the chair, if we have the energy to turn off the television!
 
Goals come in all shapes and sizes, and in as great a variety as there are people on the planet. It's all about knowing where we want to go, and discovering the different paths to get us there. But we need to know where we want to go first, for how else will we know when we have arrived?