Are OKRs Killing Your Motivation and Performance? The Neuroscience of Goal-Setting.

🧠 I’ve been delving deep into the world of neuroscience lately, exploring its impact on organizational change and leadership. One aspect that’s caught my attention is the importance of setting attainable goals. It got me thinking: Are OKRs (Objectives and Key Results) really the best approach? 🤔

OKRs often push us to set ambitious targets, aiming for around 70% achievement rather than perfection. But what if this approach unintentionally demotivates us? Recent research suggests that striving for unattainable goals may hinder us, stifling the benefits we could gain from the brain’s reward network and impacting our motivation and performance.

When we set reachable goals, our brains release dopamine, helping us focus better and stay positive, leading to improved performance. Studies by Szu-chi Huang from Stanford Graduate School of Business support this, showing that smaller sub-goals are more motivating at the project’s outset. But as we near the finish line, focusing on the big picture becomes more effective.

So, while big goals might sound impressive, we need to consider their impact on motivation and performance, especially in the corporate world, where pressure to set ambitious targets doesn’t always pay off. So, what’s the solution?

Perhaps Esther Derby‘s concept of Landing Zones could be the answer. It nicely aligns with neuroscientific research findings on goal-setting. It’s about bridging the gap between big objectives and practical progress by setting smaller, achievable milestones. By asking ourselves what one small step we can take to move in the desired direction and focusing on achieving that first, we put our brains in a positive state where they can focus and perform. Landing Zones is a smart way to leverage our brain’s natural tendencies.

What are your thoughts on this? How do you approach goal setting in your organization and strike the right balance between short- and long-term goals?