Here’s another bit of conventional wisdom: To achieve, you must have goals. This belief is so firmly entrenched that suggesting we don’t need goals—that goals may actually work against, rather than for, us—can invoke shock, horror, even rage. But that’s just what I’m going to argue. For writers especially, goal-setting is not always the best strategy. Here’s why.
First, goals are often based on insecurity. We set goals because we aren’t satisfied with our lives. We can’t be content until our first poem is published. We won’t feel good about ourselves until we find an agent. Or get a publisher. Or win a prestigious award. Our happiness and confidence come to depend on things outside ourselves, rather than on the quality of our lives.
Second, goals force us to judge ourselves and others. If our goal is to publish five short stories this year and we publish only four, we see ourselves as inadequate. We berate ourselves for not working hard enough, for lacking focus, for being untalented. If we succeed, we see ourselves as better than every writer who hasn’t published five stories. Goals create either/or thinking. We are either successful or unsuccessful. Goals achieved are like gold stars on some imaginary record: Every goal not met becomes a black mark.
To make matters worse, the loftier a goal, the more likely it is that we won’t meet it. This comes up against another piece of conventional wisdom: that we should always aim high. Dream big, we are told. Reach for that brass ring. Aim for the highest rung of the ladder. The problem is that there are precious few spaces up there on that top rung. The competition for agents and publishers is daunting. Even getting a short piece published in a small-circulation journal can be difficult. Only a tiny number of writers ever win Pulitzer Prizes or write bestsellers, and a huge number of factors go into their success—not only talent, determination, and hard work, but market forces, connections, and luck.
The worst problem with goals is that they tend not to be fulfilling in the long term. The writer who gets his first novel published is often ecstatic for weeks, even months. Then he begins to think about the next novel. Being a one-book Charley is almost as bad as being unpublished, he thinks. He has to get the next book out there—and it has to sell at least as well as the first or he’ll see himself as (gasp!) a failure. Achieving goals feels good, but its joy is emphemeral.
I’m not saying that we should never have goals. Some people function better with them than without, and others are so addicted to goal-setting that they couldn’t give it up if they tried. But we need to see goals for what they are: strategies that, at best, can help us plan, and, at worst, can make us miserable. In no case should they be the stars that guide our careers or our lives.
Fortunately, there is something better than goal-setting to keep us on track, give us focus, and help us build success. To find out what, tune in next week, when I’ll discuss intention—what it is, how it differs from goal-setting, and the blessings it can bring.
i’ve known a whole lot of people who have spent most of their life being a “success on hold” because they are so fixed on their set goal that they know they have no idea of what they’re going to do after the goal has been reached, and that scares them.
I remember a sermon by a wise priest that mentioned how many people never live in the now–it is after I finish college, after the kids are in school, after they’re grown . . He said to live wisely is to be like a gardener–to love it as it is, but to look for improvement. I think that is like what you mean as intention–not “I’m going to grow 20 lbs of cucumbers, but, “the strawberries didn’t grow too well here–I’m going to move them where there’s more shade. There’s a new king of tomato I want to try that will extend the growing season.”
oops “kind” of tomato
Meat, milk, butter and eggs (along with vegetables!) *are* an ideal diet for most of us — it was the newer conventional wisdom that saturated fat and cholesterol were the roots of all evil (and pasta was a health food) which sent the rates of metabolic syndrome and related diseases soaring during my lifetime. Fortunately, the pendulum in most Western countries is swinging back the other direction, as doctors slowly wake to the fact that recent research fails to support any of their previous advice. (I spend hours each week reading about nutrition, and would be happy to point you to further resources.) It’s odd that you should mention this in a post knocking conventional wisdom. 🙂
That said, I appreciate this and your more recent post (January 2014) pointing to various blog posts on systems rather than goals. This meshes very well with some thoughts I’ve had about this year’s New Year’s Resolution, so thank you!
Thanks for your comments, Ellen. We’re going to have to agree to disagree about the nutrition on this one! In any case, I don’t eat animal products because of concern over the rights of animals to their own bodies, so for me the nutritional concerns are secondary.