We often hear stories of companies that keep two sets of books. One set is used for the government or other regulatory agencies. This one paints of picture of the business that falls within the governing body’s accepted ways of doing business. The other set actually shows what’s going on in the business. That’s the one from which decisions and actions are made. Of course, keeping two sets of books in this way is illegal and not a good idea.

However, lately I’ve been recommending this strategy to the leaders with whom I work. Well, I’m not recommending this exact strategy – there is a slight twist.

Many organizations fall short when it comes to goal settings. Attempts to have “objective” or “quantifiable” goals often lead to statements that are tactical and activity-based. After all, it is much easier to see and prove that you’ve implemented a new process than it is to show that you are actually delivering better results due to that process.

Leaders who attempt to create goals that are truly results oriented fall into two traps:

1) They might not be able to provide an exact metric (or an “acceptable” metric) and are criticized and forced to turn them into activity-based goals (which would have been easier to do in the first place)

2) Their peers all have activity-based goals which are easier to achieve. This puts the leader at a disadvantage at the end of the year when his or her achievements are compared against peers.

The solution – two sets of “books”; the goals that you create for the formal HR process and the goals that you create for yourself to run the business.

The first set is written for your boss, HR, or whoever else is involved in your Performance Management. These goals comply with the standards, style, guidelines, and expectations set forth by the formal process. By aligning with the process, you’ll ensure that you won’t be penalized for trying to achieve real results.

The second set should be the outcome-based changes that you are trying to affect. Your personal measure of success and all of your actions should be driven by achieving these goals. You shouldn’t be satisfied until they are met, regardless of the status of your formal goals.

By staying focused on true outcomes, you’ll achieve three things:

1) You’ll increase your chances of actually impacting the business

2) You’ll still achieve the formal, activity-based goals (assuming that you have to do the activities to get the outcomes). However, the opposite isn’t always true – achieving the activity doesn’t always guarantee the outcome.

3) You’ll set yourself up for long term success. Sure, people who hit their annual activity-based goals win in the short term. However, over time, the people who succeed are the ones who become known for having a real impact on the business. Those short-term, activity-based contributions are soon forgotten along with the person who achieved them.

In an ideal world, there wouldn’t be a need for two sets of goals. Unfortunately, few of us work in an ideal world. Until organizations and leaders truly embrace an outcome focus, you might have to keep a second set of books.

The good news is that, in this case, the second set isn’t only legal, it actually benefits both you and the organization.

——————–
Brad Kolar is the President of Kolar Associates, a leadership consulting and workforce productivity consulting firm. He can be reached at brad.kolar@kolarassociates.com.