Most people have heard of the mnemonic SMART.  What you may not know is that this heuristic will turn 40 next year.  Written by George T. Doran, it was first published in 1981 [1].

Is SMART a Smart Thing?

SMART has existed my entire professional career.  During this time I have seen it applied almost dogmatically.  As a result, there are many criticisms of the acronym [2] that I have grouped into the following six themes: 

1. Reduced Optionality: Too much goal specificity removes options, flexibility and the ability to capitalize on opportunities that arise while slavishly pursuing that goal.  
2. Lack of Anti-Goals: SMART focuses on what is to be accomplished but ignores the ‘anti-goals’; things to avoid so as to be successful [3].
3. Goals as Drudgery: similar to number 1, too much specificity removes the human element and thus creativity or personal ownership in accomplishing the goal. 
4. Stretch Before you Goal: Further to number 3, the person receiving the goal may not have a reason to go beyond it once it is achieved.  Less specificity or more unachievableness can turn a sure-thing into a moon shot.  
5. Unintended Consequences: An attained result may meet all specific measurements and within a time-frame – and be exactly what the organization does not want [4].  
6. Variations on a Theme: Not so much a criticism of the original S.M.A.R.T. mnemonic as its evolution over the past 4 decades; there are now numerous variations on not only the original 5 letters [5, 6] but also adding letters (e.g. SMARTER) [7] or even completely different acronyms (e.g. PURE = Positively stated, Understood, Relevant, Ethical) [5].  

The above seem to be valid criticisms, but let’s go back to Doran’s original article and see if it warrants these critiques.

A SMART Start

When Dr. Doran first published the acronym [1], the letters stood for the following: 

• Specific: target a specific area for improvement. 
• Measurable: quantify or at least suggest an indicator of progress.
• Assignable: specify who will do it.
• Realistic: state what results can realistically be achieved, given available resources. 
• Time-related: specify when the result(s) can be achieved. 

Over time, the “A” drifted from Assignable to Achievable.  Personally, I am not a big fan of this change as achievable is covered by ‘Realistic’.  Without the ‘Assignable’ quantity, the question of ‘Who’ is doing the work is not addressed.  

A SMART Article

The original article is widely available through an internet search [8].  Nearly forty years on, it has held up very well (save for a few old date references).  Some of the salient points Doran makes includes: 

• Goals Versus Objectives: they are used inter-changeably but for a planning practitioner, they are different:
  • Goals represent executive beliefs and philosophies, expressed in a continuous and long-term manner.  
  • Objectives give quantitative support and expression to management’s beliefs; they are critical to an organization’s management process,
• Unintended Compounding: Poorly articulated objectives result in compounding errors in judgement and implementation throughout the organization.  
• Drudgery of Writing: Objectives are a chore to write and must serve the twin demands of managing change affecting the organization while giving individuals the latitude to accomplish the objective.  
• A SMART 5 is Nice But Not Required: To the above point, not every objective needs to have all 5 criteria although the more that are met, the clearer the objective.  
• Be Realistic when writing objectives (emphasis added):
  • “Notice that these criteria don’t say that all objectives must be quantified on all levels of management. In certain situations it is not realistic to attempt quantification, particularly in staff middle-management positions. Practicing managers and corporations can lose the benefit of a more abstract objective in order to gain quantification. It is the combination of the objective and its action plan that is really important. Therefore, serious management should focus on these twins and not just the objective.“

In summary, SMART is a method to help managers describe the intentions for the future based on best available information at the time of writing.  Objectives can be changed; they should be practical and the SMART acronym is there to help – not apply another set of rules.  Doran was SMART from the very beginning, something we should remember when using his most famous acronym.  

A Mnemonic (and life) Well Lived

Dr. Doran lived to see S.M.A.R.T. turn 30 before passing away on November 30, 2011 at the age of 72 [9].  Based on his obituary, Dr. Doran seems to have been well loved but not nearly as well known as his famous SMART.  

Notes and Further Reading

1. Doran, G. T. (1981). “There’s a S.M.A.R.T. Way to Write Management’s Goals and Objectives”, Management Review, Vol. 70, Issue 11, pp. 35-36.
2. Acronym or Mnemonic?  Based on this definition, SMART seems more mnemonish.  I have seen SMART described as both so obviously it is not Specific, measurable but is realistic about its definitions.  https://www.differencebetween.com/difference-between-mnemonic-and-vs-acronym/
3. Also known as the concept of inversion, it seems the ‘Anti-goal’ concept got legs when described by Warren Buffett’s business partner, Charlie Munger at a stock holder meeting in 2000.  See: Staff, Motley Fool. “Charlie Munger Speaks – Part 2.” The Motley Fool, May 15, 2000. https://www.fool.com/archive/boringport/2000/05/15/charlie-munger-speaks-part-2.aspx.
4. The Wikipedia page and an internet search are an excellent way to lose a few hours of your life reading about this topic, apparently an unintended consequence of writing (or reading) this blog.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unintended_consequences.
5. The Wikipedia definition lists a number of alternative acronyms https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SMART_criteria.
6. Using the above Wikipedia listing of alternative SMART variations, there seems to be about 1,400 permutations.  Hmmm, I think it would be SMART to stick with Dr. Doran’s original.  

7. In 2012, Graham Yemm is credited with adding an ‘ER’ to create SMARTER [Yemm, Graham. FT Essential Guide to Leading Your Team: How to Set Goals, Measure Performance and Reward Talent. Pearson UK, 2012.]:

   • Specific / Measurable.
   • Achievable: Setting Objectives at the right organizational level; in a person’s control, reasonable time frame, understands constraints, possible and practical. 
   • Relevant: to a person or team’s role and not in conflict with other objectives.
   • Time-bound. 
   • Evaluated: validation of performance and progress so as to provide support, resources, etc. as required. 
   • Reviewed: evaluating the result for learning and coaching purposes. 
8.  If you don’t have the patience to do the search, download it from the Temple University in Philadelphia, United States: S.M.A.R.T-Way-Management-Review.pdf.
9. Dr. Doran’s obituary: https://www.legacy.com.
10. Some of the above blog was influenced by this excellent summary: https://www.projectsmart.co.uk/brief-history-of-smart-goals.php.
11. An interview with Dr. Doran about a year before his death.