The SMART method has been praised as infallible. For some, however, it’s like the ‘unsinkable’ Titanic. But if the method is so good, why does it often fail creative tasks?

It’s not that SMART goals are bad; it’s that they are designed for predictable environments. In a corporate setting, if you put in X hours of ‘Specific’ and ‘Measurable’ work, you get Y result. Writing is a ‘black box’ process – you can sit in the chair for four hours and come out with zero usable sentences, or solve a plot hole during a 10-minute shower.

What Exactly Are SMART Goals?

The method was developed for corporate management but has been widely adopted in personal development to bring structure and accountability to goal-setting.

SMART is an acronym for:

• Specific: The goal is clear and unambiguous (e.g., ‘Write a 3,000-word short story’ vs. ‘Write more’).
• Measurable: There is a concrete metric to track progress, like word counts, pages, or hours.
• Achievable: The goal is realistic and within your current reach or resources.
• Relevant: The goal aligns with your long-term values or career path.
• Time-bound: There is a hard deadline or a set timeframe for completion.

Why They Can Fail for Writers

For many creatives, SMART goals feel like a ‘corporate checklist’. They often emphasise binary outcomes (you either hit the number or you fail) and leave little room for the non-linear nature of creativity, where ‘idle’ periods of thinking or unexpected breakthroughs are just as important as measurable output.

• The ‘Specific’ Problem: Writing is an act of discovery. A writer can set a specific goal of creating a 300-page romance in the upcoming year, just to find out that their WIP suits better a series of shorter cosy mysteries. The original specificity goes down the toilet, and, by the SMART rigid standards, you either stick to a plan that doesn’t work for you anymore, or you have failed.
• The ‘Measurable’ Trap: ‘Measurable’, for writers, can mean things like daily word count, hours of focus, or even the number of published books in a year. However, the creative mind doesn’t function like a machine. Although protecting writing time is important, continued non-productive sessions, when you force yourself to write just for the sake of it, can lead to demotivation and burnout.
• The ‘Achievable’ Paradox: Traditionally published writers often need to set ‘unachievable’ goals to survive – like hitting a major bestseller list. When we only set ‘Achievable’ goals, we might never take the creative risks that actually lead to a career-defining breakthrough. Besides, ‘Achievable’ is mostly subjective, based on perception and circumstances.
• The ‘Relevant’ Blindspot: SMART goals focus on what is ‘relevant’ to the business or the result. It rarely accounts for what is relevant to the writer’s inner world. A goal might be relevant to a deadline but completely irrelevant (or harmful) to the writer’s current mental state or inspiration levels.
• The ‘Time-Bound’ Pressure: Creativity has no respect for clocks. Putting a hard deadline on solving the ending can create a performance anxiety that actually freezes the creative brain. For a writer, ‘Time-bound’ often leads to rushed art, and rushed art is rarely good art.

How to Add Flexibility to SMART

In a creative context, the rigid ‘fixed target’ nature of SMART goals can easily lead to guilt or burnout. To make them work, they must be treated as flexible guardrails rather than brassbound contracts.

Try those small changes:

• S (Specific → Directional): Instead of a specific outcome, set a direction. In business, a specific goal assumes you know the destination. In writing, you often don’t know the destination until you arrive. By choosing a direction, you maintain the focus of a goal without creative ‘strangulation’. ‘I will explore different endings for this story for one hour’ allows for discovery and lets the creativity flow, whereas ‘I will solve the end today’ can be forced and limiting.
• M (Measurable → Range-Based): Standard measurement is binary (Pass/Fail). A range acknowledges that creativity fluctuates based on rest, mood, and complexity. Replace ‘2,000 words a day’ with a low-bar/high-bar range (e.g., 200 to 2,000 words). This honours the days when the ‘well is dry’ without breaking the habit.
• A (Achievable → Adjustable): Life happens. What’s achievable is usually decided at the very start. Adjustable recognises that your capacity changes. It prevents the ‘all-or-nothing’ mentality where missing one day may lead to quitting entirely. The Range-Based mentioned above actually helps with the rearrangements. If a week becomes chaotic, an adaptable goal scales down: ‘I can write for 10 minutes’ is better than ‘I can meet my 1-hour goal’.
• R (Relevant → Seasonal): Writers have different roles. A drafting goal is irrelevant when you’re in an editing phase or just ‘filling the well. Seasonality gives you permission to change your focus without feeling like you’re ‘getting off track’. A goal that was relevant in the ‘Drafting Season’ is not relevant in the ‘Editing Season’: You can write 1,000 ‘bad’ words a day when you’re drafting, but you can’t slack on your editing just to meet a daily word count. Adaptability means suiting a goal to what is most important in the moment.
• T (Time-bound → Milestones): Hard deadlines trigger the ‘fight or flight’ response, which can freeze the prefrontal cortex (the creative part of the brain). Rolling Milestones provide the momentum of a deadline without the paralysing fear of a calendar date. Instead of a hard date for the final draft, set a target for the next three chapters. This allows for the ‘expansion and contraction’ of the creative process.

The ‘Pivot’ Rule

The difficulty for writers isn’t that they lack discipline; it’s that they are trying to apply a static tool (SMART) to a dynamic process (Creativity). This tension is solved through adaptability, and the most important part of adaptability is the Pivot.

If the work-in-progress reveals it needs more research or a different POV, the writer must give themselves permission to ‘kill’ the original goal and draft a new one that matches the reality of the project.

Changing the goal is not a failure of discipline; it is a sign that the writer is paying attention to the work as it actually exists.

When goal-setting stops working, it is often not a productivity problem but an emotional one. If that sounds familiar, you may want to read ‘7 Practical Tips to Help Writers Struggling with Depression and Low Motivation‘.