Heading Down the Highway in My Jalopy

A common technique for goal setting is the acronym and mnemonic device called SMART. The letters stand for the following words:

S = specific
M = measurable
A = achievable
R = relevant
T = time specific

The device or tool is particularly useful in helping supervisors and employees give legs to their goals. For example, I worked with a supervisor that wanted “Josie to know Raiser's Edge software better.” Interesting, yet useless. The goal is so broadly defined as to have the concreteness of a puff of smoke. What is Josie supposed to do differently? How will she know she’s achieved the goal? What does “better” exactly mean? Using SMART, the supervisor and I recast the vague intent into a solid goal: On or before July 1st Josie can create and run intermediate level Rasier’s Edge queries that contain at least two operators and a time period. Now, Josie clearly knows what she needs to do and her chances of succeeding have increased significantly.

As helpful as SMART is, the times are a changing. The 21st century, as we shall see, demands SMARTER goals. I am not the first to suggest the additional letters. A quick search of the Internet turned up several versions of SMARTER goals: Enthusiasm and Reward; Exciting and Recorded; and Evaluate and Redo. Although these letter combinations work in most, if not in all, situations, something more significant is required. The world population is expected to top over 9 billion people in 2050, and with our insatiable consumption of resources, particularly in the developed industrial countries, the ecosystems -- the land, oceans, lakes and rivers, and atmosphere -- that support life may be reaching their carrying capacity or breaking point. Unless we radically change our ways, we are no different than the fool who drives a Cadillac over a cliff. A vision of sustainability is needed that propels us to act in balance with nature so that humans and other life can thrive forever. Sustainability must become the compass that guides our actions.

SMARTER goals can help achieve this revolutionary vision. The letters stand for the following words:

S = specific
M = measurable
A = achievable
R = relevant
T = time specific
E = environmentally responsible
R = relationship building

The radicalness is not the idea of sustainability, which, thankfully, society is slowly beginning to embrace. Rather, it’s that every goal must pass through the filter of sustainability.

Let’s say you’re the director of administrative services for a city, and the mayor asks your department to develop a program to educate residents on town services. Your team decides to create a local government academy. Using the SMART template, the team comes up with the following: On or before September 1st, at least 12 residents attend sessions on municipal finances, services, and operations. Good start. Now, let’s make it a SMARTER goal.

The department staff begins by asking about the environment impact of the academy. How much resources are being consumed? Which are renewable? Which are nonrenewable? What waste is being generated? Once everyone understands the impact, they can move towards mitigation. How can the program encourage participants to carpool? What if the senior citizens bus picked up participants in one location and drove them to the various government buildings? Can handouts be limited to one per household? What about double siding all documents or providing Internet links instead of paper copies? Can we avoid paper cups and water bottles? Obviously, there are no simple answers. It’s a balancing act of achieving results while consuming the least amount of resources and generating the least amount of waste. And, as with most activities, practice makes better.

It should be noted that the E is a different type of letter. SMART goals are value neutral. They can build a playground or pull off a bank robbery. It’s doesn’t matter. SMARTER goals, on the other hand, make a value judgment. Dumping toxic waste into a stream could never be considered a SMARTER goal.

The last letter, R, is for relationship strengthening or improving the connections between people and communities. A community is a network of interdependent relationships. Except for cave dwelling hermits, no one is self sufficient. We need and rely on each other. SMARTER goals promote relationships, which create stronger and more resilient communities. In our example, what activities could be included to help people learn about each other? Could the group create a project to benefit the community? What if email addresses were exchanged so participants could stay in touch? How about inviting participants to meet up for coffee before a session? The possibilities are there.

Admittedly, some individual pursuits lack a relationship component and make it difficult to convert them to SMARTER goals. Improving your end game in chess or learning how to play the guitar doesn’t necessarily involve others. If desired, a relationship aspect can be included. I want to play the acoustic guitar so I can jam with my friends at the Lucky Lucy bar on Fridays. Or, I want to improve my chess game so I can spend more time with my Uncle Teddy. At a minimum, the R forces the question -- how can relationships be strengthened?

The power of SMARTER goals is in its ability to push sustainability into everyday conversations and decisions. So often sustainability tools require extensive training or expensive software. A Life Cycle Assessment provides an excellent snapshot of the true cost of product or service, but it’s useless in planning a family trip to the west coast. Or, when deciding on a washer and dryer, consulting the 14001 EMS standards won’t get you far. Two minutes of training and a few examples are all that are needed to begin the journey to thinking and acting sustainably.

Let’s to return to our government academy example. A SMARTER goal for the program could be

On or before September 1st, using minimum and mostly renewable resources and generating minimum waste, at least 12 residents participated in three on-line, interactive sessions on municipal finances, services, and operations, toured seven town facilities in the senior citizen bus, and attended a graduation banquet.

I know. The sentence flow is clunky and heavy, but a jalopy headed in the right direction is preferable to driving a Cadillac over a cliff.

Slowing Down to Make a U-Turn

Defining sustainability is similar to defining justice or free will. It’s hard work. Philosophers have bickered for over 2,000 years to define these important concepts, and the results have been disappointing -- lots of books and plenty of academic tenure, but no agreed upon definition. Like justice, we have an intuitive sense of what sustainability means, but as had been demonstrated by the discussion board already, a single, memorable, meaningful definition continues to evade us.

Any journey requires we start from somewhere, and I suggest the World Business Council on Sustainable Development is a good somewhere. In 1992, they introduced and have since championed the concept of eco-efficiency. The three broad objectives of eco-efficiency are as follows:

1. Reducing the consumption of resources: This includes minimizing the use of energy, materials, water and land, enhancing recyclability and product durability, and closing material loops.
2. Reducing the impact on nature: This includes minimizing air emissions, water discharges, waste disposal and the dispersion of toxic substances, as well as fostering the sustainable use of renewable resources.
3. Increasing product or service value: This means providing more benefits to customers through product functionality, flexibility and modularity, providing additional services and focusing on selling the functional needs that customers actually want. This raises the possibility of the customer receiving the same functional need with fewer materials and less resources.

World Business Council for Sustainable Development Eco-Efficiency: Creating more value with less impact. (http://www.wbcsd.org/web/publications/eco_efficiency_creating_more_value.pdf) (2000)

Several criticisms have been lobbed at eco-efficiency. First, critics charge that eco-efficiency fails to address the issue of societal equity, one of the three bottom lines. Second, it is promoting doing less bad instead of doing no bad. That is, producing junk is still bad even if you are using fewer resources to make it. Michael McDonough and Michael Braungart in Cradle to Cradle: Remaking the Way We Make Things most forcefully articulated this view. The metaphor often used is that of a car heading in the wrong direction. It doesn’t matter if you slow the car down, because you are still headed in the wrong way.

It is true eco-efficiency doesn’t capture the idea of a fair and just community. Work needs to be done in this area. As for the second argument, the metaphor gives a clue to a response. No one disagrees human society is headed in the wrong direction. But, to turn a car around, what must first happen? The driver has to slow down to make the u-turn. Eco-efficiency is the brake to make that happen.

Eco-efficiency is the beginning point. Obviously, we need to move beyond simply using fewer resources and examine the more challenging issue of human consumption. But, a journey doesn’t start with the 45 step; it begins with the first step.

Given my position so far, are eco-efficiency and sustainability synonymous? Because eco-efficiency is narrowly focused on resource consumption, I would suggest not. Sustainability is a blimp view of the planet and society. I would define it as follows:

Sustainability is acting in balance with nature so that humanity and other life thrive forever.

I am partial to this definition for several reasons. It includes the idea of intergenerational equity – tomorrow is just as important as today. It recognizes that other creatures have the same rights as humans. It is driven by an action verb, and it is by doing that we define ourselves. Finally, it is a positive vision of what is possible.

Will some find this definition problematic? Of course! My hope is that thoughtful people have many, many discussions about the definition of sustainability, because it is only when we argue that we discover what truly matters to us.