Stretch Target, or Simple Success ?

Years back, I worked for GE. (Rather, I worked for a twig on the end of a minor branch of the massive tree which is GE. My twig was pruned soon after I left.) Anyway...

At that time, a popular management technique was to set "stretch targets". These were targets that appeared to be impossible to achieve. The idea was, you only knew what you could really achieve, if you aimed well beyond what you knew was achievable.

GE set stretch targets for entire businesses. If the target was not met, the business would be sold, or closed, or otherwise removed from the GE tree.

In October this year I set myself a stretch target. I entered the Budapest marathon.

For me, running a marathon is a stretch target... I know that I can do it, I've run several marathons, but they are always a challenge. Running a marathon in the middle of an overseas holiday -- is highly likely to fail.

So I went on holiday. Did no training for several weeks. Ran a half marathon. Did no more running for a week... And failed to finish my Budapest marathon.

I had set a stretch target -- and failed.

I said to my wife, Perhaps I should change my training plan. My wife said, Perhaps you should change your targets.

What do you think ?

Which is better ? Should I continue to set stretch targets... to enter more marathons ? I would need to toughen up my training plan. Yet I'm well into the age bracket where the body starts to deteriorate.

Should I set more achievable targets... to run distances more suited to my current physical abilities ? Less challenge but more chance of success.

Is a stretch target with the effort, or is it going to lead to burnout and depression. Is it better to aim lower and to enjoy the feelings of less meaningful success.

And here's another thought:

What if I were being paid to run ? Would my employer be happy if I ran -- and finished -- a series of not very challenging races ? Low challenge and low rewards.

What would this hypothetical employer think, if I entered marathons -- and consistently failed to finish ?

Which target -- and which result -- would my employer prefer ?

Which is better, a stretch target which is likely to lead to failure, or a simple target which is achieved, but with far less benefit.

My thoughts: Mix and match, a stretch target plus a couple that are more achievable. With the mix balanced to suit your own preference for risk.

So I'll continue to enter marathons. But I'll run some half marathons as well. And if I fail to finish a marathon -- I'll remind myself that at least I was able to finish the half.

====
Problems ? Solved

How to lose a customer

Here are some quick ways to lose a customer...

(1) Sell a product which is not fit for purpose.

For many, many years I bought Wescobee creamed honey. Why creamed ? Surely creamed honey is just honey bulked out with cheap air (as my sister once told me). Ah, but creamed honey is solid. It stays on the bread.

At least, creamed honey *should* stay on the bread. Like cream, all that beating makes it thick. No dribbles of honey falling off the bread while I try to eat my bread and honey.

Except...

Wescobee now sells creamed honey which is still semi-liquid. Just runny enough to dribble off the bread. Not fit for purpose...

Oh, and Wescobee has been sold to an out-of-state company. So my long-term loyalty is out the window.

Now I buy West Swan creamed honey. It's made in my own state. It appears to be owned in my state.

And it is thick enough to stay on my bread while I eat my bread and honey.

Fit for purpose.

(2) Use poor packaging

Kraft is a multinational conglomerate. I like to support local companies. So I looked for a local brand of peanut paste.

I found a brand of peanut paste which is made in Australia, from Australian peanuts, by an Australian company. Excellent !

This peanut paste is pure peanut. No sugar. No salt. No additive to keep the peanut oil from pooling at the top of the jar. So it tastes of pure peanut. And it comes with a pool of peanut oil sitting at the top of the jar.

My wife likes the salt and sugar taste of Kraft. I have a slight preference for the pure peanut flavour. (And I eat most of the peanut paste.) The oil is no trouble...

Except...

The lid of the jar is not oil-proof !

No worries with the first couple of jars; nothing leaked. I found a simple trick for getting the oil to mix back in before the jar is opened: sit it upside down for a week. I was worried about leakage so I sat the jar -- upside down -- on a bit of kitchen paper.

But then...

The next jar had leaked -- in the shop ! Pick a jar off the shelf -- and it was slippery with oil ! Yuk !

Seal the lid ! In the factory, screw it down tighter ! Or add a seal, under the lid.

I don't want to buy peanut paste which has leaked before I even get it out of the shop... So, for now, I'm back to Kraft.

(3) Design an awkward container

Okay, this may not be a "quick" way to lose a customer... It took me several years to change brands.. But I did change.

Nutella comes in an odd-shaped jar: a round neck with wide shoulders. It makes it very difficult to get to the Nutella in the shoulders. In fact, the size and shape of the jar make it very awkward to clean it out.

Is this deliberate ? Is the jar deliberately designed so that the last dregs are impossible to get ? So the customer always wastes some of the product -- so has to buy more ?!

Deliberate or not, it annoys me.

So I have switched brands. To Nutino.

As far as I can tell, the two products have the same ingredients. They are both a bit runny in hot weather but otherwise fine. One jar of Nutino has not been a smooth paste but the flavour -- and feel in the mouth -- is the same as ever. Both brands are Italian.

Nutino comes in a round jar with a round lid. No awkward shoulders to encourage wasting of the last dregs.

And that simple design difference caused me to change brands.

One customer, lost.

====
Problems ? Solved