SMART tasking, smart action, smart targets was all the rage until a few years ago. Why do you think it became ‘old-fashioned’ to have SMART targets and what replaced it?
The acronym SMART stands for Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-bound. These criteria were commonly used to guide the creation of well-defined objectives, ensuring they were clear, trackable, and purposeful. However, as businesses and industries evolved, the conventional SMART framework began to show its limitations.
One significant issue was that SMART targets often focused on short-term gains, neglecting long-term vision and strategic development. Additionally, the rigid structure of SMART goals sometimes stifled creativity and innovation, as it prioritized quantifiable outcomes over qualitative growth.
As a result, new approaches have emerged to address these limitations. For instance, the concept of "SMARTER" goals has gained popularity. This adaptation incorporates two extra elements: Evaluate and Readjust. By periodically assessing progress and making necessary adjustments, organizations can maintain flexibility while pursuing their objectives.
Another alternative is Objectives and Key Results (OKR), a goal-setting framework employed by renowned companies like Google and Intel. OKRs consist of an overarching, ambitious objective and 2-5 measurable key results that indicate progress towards achieving the objective. The idea is to foster alignment, engagement, and focus across the organization.
So, while SMART targets may have fallen out of favour due to their constraints, the core principles of clear, well-defined objectives remain relevant. Embracing updated frameworks and continuously refining strategies will allow you to capitalize on the strengths of SMART goals while mitigating potential drawbacks.