As the final week of the year approaches, many people start preparing for New Year’s Eve by making plans with friends and deciding what they’ll wear when the clock strikes midnight. Others prefer to stay in and skip the festivities altogether. But despite the wide range of personal preferences and plans for ringing in the new year, one thing plays on everyone’s minds: goal setting.
According to Golby, “Goal setting is fundamental for several reasons, as it provides both individuals and organizations with a strategic framework to drive growth and success.” In fact, it is these fundamentals associated with goal setting that have manifested themselves into what is considered goal setting culture: a traditional habit of creating or tracking goals, often during natural milestones that can include birthdays, seasonal shifts, or most commonly, new years.
Traditionally, New Year’s resolutions have become an integral part of the celebration of new years. However, according to the Cynic Guide to Self Improvement, “by some estimates as many as 80 percent of people fail to keep their New Year’s resolutions by February [and] only 8 percent of people stick with them the entire year.” Can this be an indication of society’s growing deviation from goals? Or does it expose a deeper flaw in goal-setting culture itself?
Statesman believes a reason for this can come from an overestimation of the goals one should have for themselves. A phenomenon often traced back to the typical cliche “out with the old, in with the new,” which indicates to individuals that when striving for change a clean break from the past is required. This grows to create unrealistic standards as the goals people set tend to be over the top as they are rooted in a motive to completely change themselves. This calls for unfeasible goal making and can, more often than not, foreshadow a link between individual goals and social standards.
Generally, social expectations and inbuilt standards create a barrier between people and authentic, realistic goal-making. The external pressures of trying to “fit in” and do what others are doing, or expect you to do, can lead people to set goals that are more about conforming to what is considered the “expected” rather than aligning with their actual needs.
This particular idea is ubiquitous at Stevenson. According to Niche, Stevenson is in the top 10 public high schools in the state. This creates a high standard of academic excellence that can distort what is considered “academically acceptable” for students who are trying to meet the denoted “Stevenson caliber.” In the end such translating into unrealistic goal-setting habits as many attempt to set overachieving goals as a way to fit in and feel like they belong within the school’s high-achieving standard.
When individuals get bogged down by environmental pressures, they can lose sight of the real purpose of goals and may instead view them as a means to prove themselves worthy of something that may not have ever been realistic. This presents goal-setting culture as a hub of self-deprecation and can have lasting effects on the way people respond to real-life situations.
For example, the toxic culture of goal setting can predispose one to a fixed rather than a growth mindset. A type of mindset in which the person is overly dependent on the result rather than the process due to the ulterior motive to meet others’ expectations rather than their own. This can take away from the learning and can heighten feelings of dissatisfaction as small failures can then often be associated with personal inadequacy and a lack to keep up with others.
A toxic goal-setting culture can also perpetuate a sense of constant negativity. With the overachieving goals that are often accompanied with current goal setting culture, failure becomes more prominent than success. This can trap someone in a cycle of self-blame and can cause one to lose motivation quickly. Leaving them not only with an unfinished goal, but also a lack of confidence. Such can even carry forward into performances at school or the workplace as they are constantly weighed down by a sense of doubt regarding their individual ability.
Nevertheless, Statesman suggests that while traditional approaches to goal-setting often foster toxic, counterproductive behavior, if exercised differently goals can instead have the potential to provide an essential aspect of personal growth and achievement. The biggest challenge then becomes to break free from external influences and focus on goals that are not only attainable but also meaningful and reflective of individual aspirations.
Statesman believes SMART goals are an easy and effective way to do so. According to BC Knowledge, “SMART stands for Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, and Timely. A SMART Goal must be specific in what is being planned for. It must be measurable progress so you can reevaluate if necessary. It should also be attainable within a certain time frame. The goal should be relevant to what you are planning for in the long-term, and it should be time-based by having a realistic date for completion.” SMART goals are a commonly accepted goal-setting system that works to establish criteria for a focused and effective way to set goals. Its main purpose is designed to provide clarity in the goal setting process, increasing the chance of success by breaking down large goals into small manageable tasks.
By breaking down significant goals into smaller ones, one boosts their chance of feeling more successful as it emphasizes small milestones that, when achieved, can boost one’s confidence and drive to work towards the larger overarching goal. Mitigating the toxicity derived from demotivation and comparison when one is unable to meet the unmanageable goal they started with in the first place.
Not only that, but by creating small, detailed goals there is more room for change when life’s circumstances alter unexpectedly. Big definitive goals can be overwhelming and often require a stagnant constant effort to maintain. However, small specific goals can give one room for change and flexibility as they can easily be altered per an individual’s needs.
They also prove less overwhelming as big goals often feel distant. By working towards smaller goals, success can become far more attainable and can consequently cultivate feelings of motivation and happiness when such occurs. This helps an individual not be weighed down by toxic comparison because they already withhold a sense of fulfillment for their personal achievements. Fulfillment leads to decreased comparison, and the social comparison theory is evidence.
The social comparison theory states that individuals run towards comparison as a way to evaluate their own actions, accomplishments and achievements. Statesman believes the reason for this can be traced back to a strong sense of self doubt within oneself that causes them to desperately try to see what others might be doing as a way to find solutions and cope with this insecurity. However, if one gains a deep seated fulfillment for their success this insecurity will be harder to manifest and will consequently prevent comparison. By setting specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound goals, individuals are encouraged to feel more content with their progress fostering a healthier, more optimistic approach to success, rather than one in which comparison plays at the forefront.
Nevertheless, some view the framework of a SMART goal-setting process as something that hinders individuality within goals. However, Statesman believes that these restrictions help keep one on track and the lack of freedom can actually act as an imperative factor in making sure goals can actually be achieved.
Freedom within the goal-setting process can call for procrastination as there is no deadline or structure that one must meet regularly. This can cause someone to easily fall off meeting their goals, only playing into the established feasibility of the current goal setting culture. In truth, SMART goals don’t prevent one from choosing what type of goals they create. Rather, they only limit the process and extent of the goal in a way that does not restrict individuality but rather fosters detailed intention, discipline, and direction.
Ultimately, it is imperative to break the toxic goal culture in order to reap the authentic benefits of goal setting. Statesman believes that the pursuit of external validation and inability to understand one’s limits distorts the success meant to be brought from goal setting, and instead manifests as toxicity and competition, especially at the school level. However, by actively working to resist these challenges through the usage of resources like SMART goals, individuals are provided a space to conduct goal setting in a productive and restricted manner. Real success doesn’t come from trying to be the absolute best at everything, but rather embracing the learning process and accepting the lows for possibilities of highs.
When we as a community begin to associate goal-making with the process and an individual sense of reform, we cultivate goal-setting culture as what it indeed should be: an action of personal growth over comparison, a choice of flexibility and adaptability over rigid deadlines, and an increased scrutiny of the derived process and habits rather than just the outcomes.