> [!tldr] "*do good work*" doesn't give your team enough to work with It takes great skill and clarity of vision to be able to properly define what "good" means for a large team to execute against successfully. - It's not enough to say "do good work". - It may not be enough to say "deliver this result". You need to understand where [[Ambiguity]] may raise its head. In cases where concrete results are impossible, you need to define sensible [[Proxy Measures]]. You must avoid [[Rule Beating]]. Keeping in mind [[Goodhart’s Law]] (when measures become target they cease being good measures). You may need [[Black and White Goals]] to inspire change, or they may alienate your team. > [!warning] Leadership is hard. Balancing all these considerations, factoring in the psychological needs and [[Psychological Safety]] of your team, understanding the [[What is a System|systems and context]] at play, what levers are available and how best to throw them, and synthesizing all of that into a [[What is a Strategy|strategic]] set of [[~7 - The Limit of Simultaneous Info|a small set of simultaneous]] success measures is **incredibly hard**. A [[Mission Statement]] is probably a good idea, but not sufficient for the whole task - and it can't [[SMART Goals|vague or irrelevant]]. Defining success can be done with behavior-based rules by laying out [[The critical moves]]. Or you can take a less implementation-opinionated approach via [[OKRs|Objectives and Key Results]]. But you have to be **clear and consistent**. Be open to change, but know when bending will break. I think some people are intuitively better at this than others. **** # More ## Source - self