ConceptsNest

  ***Continued from Chapter 01 (Covered previously: Case Studies on Goals going Awry, Inappropriate Calibration of Goals, Impact of Time Horizon on Goals,) Link to Chapter -01 Link to Chapter 01: https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/5539914399812618370/9134115350792616570 Goals Becoming Too Challenging Proponents of goal setting claim that a positive linear relationship exists between the difficulty of a goal and employee performance. Specifically, they argue that goals should be set at the most challenging level possible to inspire effort, commitment, and performance—but not so challenging that employees see no point in trying. This logic makes intuitive sense, yet stretch goals also cause serious side-effects like:- Shifting Risk Attitudes:->   Goal-setting often distorts risk preferences. People motivated by specific and challenging goals adopt riskier strategies and choose riskier gambles than do those with less challenging or vague goals. Related literature has found

  For decades, goal setting has been used as a tool for improving employee motivation and performance in organizations. Across hundreds of experiments, dozens of tasks, and thousands of people across four continents, the results are clear. Compared to vague, easy goals (e.g., “Do your best”), specific and challenging goals boost performance. Locke (1964) is credited with the very first Goal Setting Theory, where he focused on goal setting within the workplace.   He found that employees were motivated more by clearly set goals and actionable feedback to help them achieve those goals. Locke also found that motivation is key to achieving our goals, and we feel more motivated when we’re not 100% certain we can achieve the goal we’ve set for ourselves. Taking on challenges is highly motivational as it allows us to develop our skills, flex our problem-solving muscles, and gain a deeper sense of personal achievement. But has the systematic harm caused by goal setting been largely ignor

  The ancient Stoic philosophers like Marcus Aurelius, Seneca, and Epictetus regularly conducted an exercise known as a premeditatio malorum, which translates to a “premeditation of evils.” The goal of this exercise was to envision the negative things that could happen in life. For example, the Stoics would imagine what it would be like to lose their job and become homeless or to suffer an injury and become paralyzed or to have their reputation ruined and lose their status in society. The Stoics believed that by imagining the worst-case scenario ahead of time, they could overcome their fears of negative experiences and make better plans to prevent them . While most people were focused on how they could achieve success, the Stoics also considered how they would manage failure. This way of thinking, in which we consider the opposite of what we want, is known as inversion. It is a rare and crucial skill that nearly all great thinkers use to their advantage. How Great Thinkers Shatter th

  The ancient Stoic philosophers like Marcus Aurelius, Seneca, and Epictetus regularly conducted an exercise known as a premeditatio malorum, which translates to a “premeditation of evils.” The goal of this exercise was to envision the negative things that could happen in life. For example, the Stoics would imagine what it would be like to lose their job and become homeless or to suffer an injury and become paralyzed or to have their reputation ruined and lose their status in society. The Stoics believed that by imagining the worst-case scenario ahead of time, they could overcome their fears of negative experiences and make better plans to prevent them . While most people were focused on how they could achieve success, the Stoics also considered how they would manage failure. This way of thinking, in which we consider the opposite of what we want, is known as inversion. It is a rare and crucial skill that nearly all great thinkers use to their advantage. How Great Thinkers Shatte

  A deer may be startled by a loud noise and take off through the forest, but as soon as the threat is gone, the deer immediately calms down and starts grazing. And it does not appear to be in anxiety about it later. Let us playact for a moment that we are that deer, living in the grasslands of India. We have slim long feet that help us get into a sprint quickly and pruned senses that pick up signs of danger, a majestic antelope that grabs attention from the group of humans that, every now and then, come driving around on a jungle expedition taking pictures of us. Perhaps the biggest difference between us and our other deer friends, and the humans taking our photograph is that nearly every decision we make (as a deer) provides an immediate benefit to our life . When we are hungry, we walk over and chomp on a bush. When it rains, we shelter under a tree. When we spot a tiger, we run away. Most of our choices as a deer—like what to eat or where to sleep or when to avoid a predator—make