Goal Setting Theory Revisited
Why GST's Linear Model Breaks Down for the Solo Professional - Part 2 of 4
Goal Setting Theory promises a straightforward path to achievement: set specific, challenging goals, create detailed plans, execute systematically, and reach your predetermined destination. This linear progression feels logical, almost mathematical in its certainty.
Yet for the solo professional, this sequential model more frequently leads to frustration than fulfillment.
The problem isn't your execution or commitment. The problem is that GST's linear assumptions clash with how success unfolds without the structure and support of a corporate environment.
The Linear Promise of GST
Locke and Latham's research established a transparent causal chain.
A specific goal leads to focused attention, which drives sustained effort, which produces measurable progress, which arrives at a predetermined outcome. This is the corporate staircase model of achievement in a nutshell.
In a corporate environment, linear progression works because the structure supports it. You have defined roles with clear advancement paths. You receive regular feedback through established review cycles. You operate within predictable resource allocations and established processes.
The corporate ladder provides the metaphor and the mechanism for linear goal achievement. Each rung represents a measurable milestone toward a well-defined destination.
When Linear Thinking Meets Reality
Anne-Laure Le Cunff discovered this mismatch firsthand during her time at Google. Despite achieving everything the linear model promised, something felt fundamentally wrong.
She had the perfect setup for GST-style goal achievement. Google provided clear objectives for each project. Career advancement followed a documented rubric that specified what skills and accomplishments were needed for promotion. The path was mapped out before her.
As Le Cunff describes it: "Career success was codified around two tangible concepts: the ladder for your role and the level for your seniority. The promotion process was based on a rubric telling you exactly what skills you need to have demonstrated to graduate to the next level."
She executed flawlessly, climbed the ladder systematically, and achieved her goals on schedule, yet she felt increasingly disconnected from the work that was supposed to fulfill her.
The linear model worked exactly as designed, but it was optimizing for the wrong outcomes.
The Breakthrough Moment
Le Cunff's transformation began only when she abandoned linear thinking entirely. After leaving Google, she didn't create a detailed business plan with specific milestones and target dates. Instead, she embraced "tiny experiments."
Rather than setting a goal to "build a successful online business," she started with curiosity about how the human brain works. This led to her writing articles, which attracted readers and created opportunities she could never have planned.
Her success emerged through iteration and adaptation, not predetermined execution. Each experiment revealed new possibilities that couldn't have been anticipated in advance.
She says, "I'm playing a different game: a game of noticing, questioning, and adapting."
Why Linear Goals Fail Solo Professionals
The fundamental issue is that GST's linear model assumes environmental predictability that solo professionals rarely enjoy. Corporate employees operate within systems designed to minimize uncertainty and provide stable platforms for goal achievement.
Solo professionals face constant variability. Your best opportunities often emerge from unexpected conversations, market shifts, or client requests that couldn't have been predicted when you set your annual goals. Success requires recognizing and responding to these openings, not just executing predetermined plans.
Le Cunff identifies "the trap of linear goals." These goals encourage “toxic productivity,” where you become so focused on predetermined outcomes that you miss better opportunities emerging around you.
Let’s see how this plays out practically.
A traditional goal-setting approach has you target “a 25% increase in revenue by expanding the client base in financial services." But what happens when a casual conversation at a coffee shop reveals an unexpected opportunity in healthcare technology that could be far more lucrative and personally fulfilling?
The linear model treats this as a distraction from your "real" goals, while the experimental model treats it as valuable data about emerging possibilities.
The Iterative Alternative
Le Cunff's approach demonstrates what goal achievement looks like when you embrace non-linearity. Instead of fixing on predetermined destinations, you develop "systematic curiosity,” a structured approach to exploring possibilities and adapting based on what you discover.
This doesn't mean abandoning direction or structure. It means designing your goal-setting process to capture value from uncertainty rather than trying to eliminate it.
Her journey from Google employee to neuroscience researcher to successful entrepreneur couldn't have been planned using traditional goal-setting frameworks. Each phase was built on discoveries from the previous phase, creating a path that only became visible in retrospect.
The Cost of Forcing Linearity
When a solo professional forces GST's linear model onto their non-linear reality, several problems emerge.
To begin with, you miss opportunities that don't fit your predetermined plan. You continue pursuing goals that market feedback suggests aren't viable because abandoning them feels like failure. You optimize for predictable progress rather than maximum value creation.
But most importantly, you lose the adaptive capacity that represents your key advantage over larger, more structured organizations. Your ability to pivot quickly and capitalize on emerging opportunities becomes constrained by rigid goal frameworks designed for corporate environments.
Embracing Non-Linear Success
The alternative isn't chaos or lack of direction. It's designing goal-setting approaches that harness uncertainty rather than fight it. This means shifting from outcome-focused to process-focused goals that generate learning and adaptation.
Instead of "achieve X revenue by Y date," you run experiments that test assumptions about market demand and customer needs. Instead of "launch product Z," you discover what problems potential customers most want solved.
This approach aligns with how successful solo professionals build their careers and businesses: through iteration, experimentation, and intelligent response to feedback.
Beyond the Corporate Staircase
Le Cunff's story illustrates what becomes possible when you abandon the linear model entirely. By embracing uncertainty and designing for discovery rather than predetermined outcomes, she created a career and business that couldn't have been planned using traditional frameworks.
Her success came not from better execution of linear goals, but from developing better tools for navigating non-linear reality. This represents a fundamental shift from GST's assumptions about how goal achievement works.
The next step involves examining how different types of goals require different approaches. And why the one-size-fits-all mentality of traditional frameworks fails to account for the diverse challenges solo professionals face.
Practical Application
Evaluate your current goals against these questions:
Are you forcing linear progression in areas where iterative experimentation might yield better results?
Do your goals leave room for pivoting when you discover better opportunities?
Are you optimizing for predictable progress or maximum value creation?
Have you confused activity with achievement by focusing too heavily on predetermined milestones?
For Further Study
Le Cunff, Anne-Laure. Tiny Experiments: How to Live Freely in a Goal-Obsessed World. Self-published, 2024. Le Cunff's experience demonstrates how embracing uncertainty and experimentation can lead to more fulfilling and successful outcomes than traditional linear goal-setting approaches.
Taleb, Nassim Nicholas. Antifragile: Things That Gain from Disorder. New York: Random House, 2012. Taleb's concept of antifragility provides a framework for understanding how systems and individuals can benefit from uncertainty rather than merely surviving it, offering insights relevant to non-linear goal achievement.