In a classic business context it is usual to have things like Key Performance Indicators, Targets or Critical Success Factors and it is always recommended that these should be SMART. But there is a lot more to achieving a goal than simply applying the SMART acronym. I have been a student of applied psychology for over 20 years now and I am always curious about finding the difference that makes the difference.
There is so much hype around these days about the ‘Power of Positive Thinking’ and while I agree that it can be useful in many circumstances, especially when faced with challenges that can at times seem overwhelming, it is important to recognise that according to research done by Rodger Bailey up to 40% of the working population are only motivated by problems and wanting to avoid negative consequences.
The difference that makes a difference between achieving a goal or not will ultimately depend on your level of motivation. Motivation is the fuel that drives your energy and now more than ever, you need significant amounts of energy in order to achieve your goals.
Where does your motivation come from?
So, it is worth thinking about . . . where does your motivation come from? Is it from the things you will get, what you will achieve and the benefits of achieving it? Or does it come from what you will avoid, what you won’t have and the problems you will no longer have to deal with?
A while ago a client of mine was assessed against the Investors In People (IiP) standard and although they had previously been awarded IiP Recognition, the assessor found that they needed to implement more systems and procedures in order to comply with the requirements laid down by Investors in People UK. In other words, they were no longer meeting the standard.
There were a number of things that they needed to do more of, like doing more consistent appraisals, clarifying management competencies and evaluating training and development activity. A number of months went by before much action was taken and even then the directors did not really seem to think that there was a big problem as long as the sales turnover was good; there was not really that much to worry about. They had an action plan that detailed all that needed to be done, yet there was a lack of progress. A lack of motivation.
The months continued to pass without much happening with the Action Plan and when the next Assessment date started to approach it become clear that there was still a lot to do. It was only when the Directors fully realised that if they did not achieve recognition at the next IiP assessment they would lose their Investors in People status, that things began to shift. They realised that they would have to declare to all staff that the Directors and Management Team were failing to meet the standard despite having a year to improve. It took a while for it to sink in, but finally they recognised that this was something they did not want to face.
When it gets bad enough . . .
They wanted to avoid being de-recognised because they acknowledged that it would be bad for morale and certainly not make the management team look good, in fact it would make them look pretty bad!
No matter how much they'd thought about the benefits of IiP, for example; the improved communication, motivation, targeted development of people and effective evaluation of development activity, it was losing status and the concern about looking bad that got them motivated.
So, sometimes, no matter how much positive thinking you apply, it is actually focusing on the negative consequences, a problem that will arise from inaction or complacency that create the motivation to get you started. There is no right or wrong in this – one way is not ‘better’ than the other – as long as it gets you into action!
You may also want to think about how this applies to others you work with, that is; clients, peers or the people you manage. What will really motivate them to take action, to get started?
Be prepared to use both
Just because you might be motivated by what you want to have and to achieve, it doesn't mean that everyone is like that. In fact, think back to Rodger Bailey's statistics of 40% of the working population who have some degree of need to move away from problems. Even though it may make you feel uncomfortable, do you need to emphasise the negative consequences of non-achievement? Do you need to emphasise the problems that need to be overcome in order to get your people motivated?
I also have plenty of examples where clients have reluctantly invoked their Disciplinary Procedures (sometimes at very high levels) and yet it was the thing that made a significant difference in the person’s performance.
If you want to make sure you engage both the people motivated by achieving goals and the ones motivated by avoiding problems, you will need to present the outcomes you want and (even though it may make you feel uncomfortable) you will also need to explain the negative consequences you want to avoid.
Why not experiment with it? Let me know how you get on.
Remember . . . Stay Curious
With best regards
David Klaasen