I still remember being at EVhype when a teammate glanced at a vague roadmap and said, "Okay, that question is now at the forefront of my strategy." I remember asking myself, "When I set a goal, what does 'done' look like?" When I set expectations with my team, I would have to break down these big goals into weekly "visible wins" - outcomes we can check and not just intentions. Instead of "improve our charging-station map", we can say, "ship two accuracy fixes and test them on 20 stations." It eliminates the guessing and makes everyone feel the urgency of the goal instead of guessing if they are on track. I always recommend taking a goal and trying to rephrase the idea into a sentence that ends with, "so we know we are successful when." If the last part of that sentence is vague, we are probably going to cause some confusion.
I've always followed the SMART acronym - making goals Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-bound. It's a great structure to ensure your team develops meaningful goals. However, there is an important I always take before my team kicks off their goal setting, and that is providing clarity on our overall team's goal, opportunities for the next year, and budget. This provides structure and guidance so team members know how their goals serve the bigger picture and, more importantly, that what they do matters. I see goal setting as a time to spark motivation and excitement for the year to come, so I strive to make sure my team feels valued, important, and like they get to work on the opportunities they're passionate about.
We run a law firm with over twenty attorneys. This has some similarities to herding cats, especially in regard to meeting their billing goals. There is an old truism in business that goes something like, "That which you measure you can manage and what you manage you can improve." The first trick is getting your measurements right because they are what you base your goals on. From there you have to state and repeatedly publish the goals. You will quickly see who on your team has the commitment to reach them by how they perform in response. The ones that don't step up are likely the ones you do not want on your team.
I have a three-step strategy in setting goals. The first thing you do is set target outcomes. Next, identify the actions needed to get there. Finally, find the shortest and clearest steps among those actions toward your goal. When it comes to setting expectations, I break down objectives into quarterly priorities. It lessens the pressure on people and gives off a more achievable vibe. When people think something is doable, they make better efforts to achieve it. My advice for successful goal setting is to write down what you want the end results to look like. If you can't define it clearly, then you won't be able to execute it. It sounds simple but doing this helps ground goals into realistic outcomes.
Here's my insight on setting clear, achievable, and motivating goals and expectations for teams based on a decade of experience building distributed, hard-working teams and an agency environment: Make "setting expectations" actually two-way commitments (not just leader-to-team expectations letters) The biggest unlock I've had is treating expectation-setting as a two-way street. It's not to say leaders do not try to be clear with their communications. But without giving or creating a specific moment to double-check that one has read and understood the explicit hermeneutics of it, one cannot expect the same level of commitment and accountability from teams regarding those expectations. It becomes more like assumptions, and assumptions are a killer for accountability. This is why, for every crisp expectation/goal I have for a member of my team, I sit down and spend a few moments walking them through the what, why, and the context around the what, then I ask them to do the same - walk me through what I've told them and name what's missing. The typical trap and answer to this process is "Does it make sense?" Instead of going for the simple answer, I ask them, "what have I left out? What makes this harder? Will you be able to commit to this? If not, what will make you able to commit to this?" Doing this is turning a simple thoughtless "here are the tasks I need you to do" into a two-way commitment. In my experience, this simple addition to the whole process of setting expectations helped get rid of ambiguity... Here's the thing, on one of the projects where we applied this little trick, deadline slippage has gone down by 60%. Now, to make this more visible, we practice whiteboarding every expectation a member of the team has on everyone in their respective one-on-one meetings. Team members write down not just what I've assigned to them, but also all "invisible" expectations they get from others, including clients, senior colleagues, etc., and even self-imposed ones. We go through and prune them all and then prioritize three to avoid being overwhelmed. This allows us to keep track of those commitments and ensures everyone really holds up their end of it. This whole "visible commitments" approach brings this sense of clarity that we really benefit from and spreads like wildfire because it eliminates any misalignment before they get a chance to become a serious problem.