Talk:SMART (project management)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Merging
Should this page be merged with Objective (goal) and Goal (management)?
LookingGlass 08:08, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Coinage
I believe this theory was founded by Peter Drucker in his "management by objectives" theory (1954) and the R stood for "Realistic." Is anybody could shed some light on this? 194.109.248.110 14:40, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Example?
It would be nice to have an example showing a non-SMART formulated objective, and the same objective formulated in the SMART way. As it is now I still fail to understand what do to with this. --Bjørn 15:56, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
Bjorn
Although the heading suggests this subject relates to Project Mnagement it is just as valuable, probably even more so, in all types of Management Roles.
The area that causes the most problems, and where people get it wrong, is in the SPECIFIC section of the SMART objective. Imagine you run a call centre and you want someone to be able to answer a new type of call, lets call it the XYZ type of call. There is a 1 day course, lets call it the ABC course, to be held on 28.6.07, that will teach people how to deal with this type of call. Typically the objective that is set for these attendees would be:
"ATTEND THE ABC COURSE BY THE END OF JUNE"
At first glance this looks to be Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant and Timely. However, the problem is that attending the course is just a task. SMART Objectives should be set to get people to achieve something, not do something. Just going on the course will not necessarily get the calls answered to the standard required. The objective should specify what you want to be achieved. This can be really difficult to do (I make a lot of money doing this for large organisations who aren't getting the results they expect). The S (Specific) should very clearly state the performance standard required.
If this was our business let's consider what we want to achieve by sending someone on the course. Surely the aim is to have the calls answered without complaint from the caller, and without having to constantly supervise the operator.
Once you have the answer to "what do I want them to achieve?" you can then phrase it. I suggest that the objective should be:
"TO BE ABLE TO ANSWER THE XYZ TYPE OF CALLS BY THE END OF JULY(they would need time to practice and have some on-the-job tuition after they have attended the course), UNSUPERVISED AND WITHOUT CUSTOMER COMPLAINT"
This meets all the criteria and is more likely to get better results than just sending someone on a course. The measure of success is "UNSUPERVISED AND WITHOUT CUSTOMER COMPLAINT". It will beveryu obvious, when you are assessing how well they have done, whether they have achieved this or not.
Sounds simple doesn't it? but in practice, really good managers find it is really quite difficult to do. That is why large companies ask me to do it for them. Research shows that if you get this right a companies performance improves by approx 34%
Ron Locke. 11.3.07 Email: ronlocke@hotmail.com
[edit] Meaning of R in S.M.A.R.T.
That R should mean realistic instead of relevant is strange, for there would be a redundancy to achievable. --Dan Polansky 17:48, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Meaning of R in S.M.A.R.T.E.R.
Seen from a project quality managempent perspective, the last R should mean also registrated, reported and the M should mean Monitored. Goals, objectives, KPI's should be measured, registrated, reported and monitored --193.109.72.103 (talk) 07:56, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Meaning of T in S.M.A.R.T.
T as time-bound is preferable to timely, time framed and timebound, says googling and Wiktionary. --Dan Polansky 16:15, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
