14. Define SMART Objectives Leading to the Goal

Note: In this framework, the term initiative refers to programs and projects. The term work execution unit refers collectively to programs, projects, phases, releases, and work packages, all of which are considered temporary organizations.

Differentiating Goals from Objectives

A clear terminological distinction is necessary for effective planning within any work execution unit. While various methodologies exist, the presented framework prefers the pairing of “goals and objectives” to structure planning efforts. This distinction is fundamental and applies hierarchically to all work execution units.

• Goal: A goal is a general statement that defines the target state to be achieved by a specific work execution unit (e.g., a program, a project, a phase, a release or a work package) by its completion and serves to unite stakeholders toward a common direction. It defines what is to be accomplished without specifying the methods.
• Objective: An objective is a more detailed and specific statement. Objectives are intermediate targets of a work execution unit that structure and guide the work toward the goal of that work execution unit.

This relationship is recursive across all work execution units. The goal of a subordinate work execution unit (like a project) often represents a specific objective for its parent work execution unit (like a program).

For example, if a program’s goal is to achieve “enhanced transparency,” a key objective for that program might be to implement a new software system. This program objective then becomes the overarching goal for the project tasked with its delivery.

Aligning Deliverables with the Goal

During the initialization of any work execution unit, from a program down to a work package, it is essential to confirm that its goal deliverable directly satisfies the goal of that work execution unit. This alignment is verified by asking a critical validation question. This step occurs after an initial evaluation of alternative solutions has been completed.

Using the example of a work execution unit with the goal of increasing transparency and a primary deliverable of an online tracking system, the verification question would be: “If we were to use an online system that shows the status of all transactions, would we achieve the desired level of transparency?”

• If the answer is affirmative, the work execution unit can proceed with confidence in its core strategy.
• If the answer is negative, either the goal or the goal deliverable must be revised until alignment is achieved.

This validation process ensures that each work execution unit is correctly structured to contribute to the objectives of its parent.

Decomposing Goals into Actionable Objectives

Once the high-level goal and goal deliverable for a work execution unit are established and aligned, the next step is to descend to a more detailed level of planning. This involves defining the specific intermediate targets, namely objectives, that structure the work toward completing the goal deliverable and achieving the goal. These objectives, in turn, produce their own intermediate deliverables.

This decomposition occurs at every level. A program’s objectives may be delegated as goals to its constituent projects. A project’s objectives are accomplished through its phases or releases, and a release’s objectives are fulfilled by completing specific work packages.

Continuing with the example of an online system intended to increase transparency, the following objectives and their resulting intermediate deliverables can be defined for the relevant work execution unit:

Applying the SMART Framework to Objectives

To be effective, all objectives defined for any work execution unit must adhere to the SMART criteria. This framework ensures clarity, accountability, and feasibility for objectives defined for each work execution unit.

Specific and Measurable

Objectives must be unambiguous and quantifiable. While some objectives, such as “implement an online application,” may seem specific in their initial formulation, others require further refinement to become measurable.

• Key Performance Indicators (KPIs): Defining KPIs is a helpful method for making objectives measurable. This is a universal practice applicable to objectives at any level.
• Example Refinement: The objective “training the organization and suppliers” can be made more specific and measurable by reformulating it as: “Train the organization’s personnel as well as suppliers’ staff to use the solution by xx date, as measured by a capability test with a minimum score of x%.”
• Technical Requirements: For technical deliverables like online systems, databases, and workflows, the detailed KPIs are typically established as part of the functional requirements and quality attributes for the solution.

Achievable and Realistic

The achievability and realism of an objective depend on the specific capabilities and available resources of the organization responsible for the work execution unit.

• Context Dependency: An objective that is achievable for one organization may not be for another. This principle holds true regardless of the scale of the work execution unit. Several analogies illustrate this point:
• Sending a person to the moon was achievable for NASA but not for others.
• Making all written knowledge accessible might be achievable for Google but not for other companies.
• Obtaining a project management certification is achievable for some individuals but not for everyone.
• Motivational Balance: Objectives should be challenging enough to motivate the team but must remain attainable. Setting unachievable objectives can be highly demotivating for the personnel assigned to any work execution unit.

Time-based

Every objective, at every level from program to work package, must have a clearly defined deadline or timeframe for completion. In the provided examples, this is consistently represented by the phrase “by xx date,” establishing a clear temporal constraint for each action.