“Joe” an executive I know, sent me his list of New Year’s resolutions and it reminded me of a cartoon I’ve seen and its written counterpart that’s been around for ages:

Person 1: “Would you like to see my New Year’s resolutions?”
Person 2: “Aren’t they the same ones you show me every year?”

He sends the list every year, as kind of an informal accountability function. He keeps it short, just a few things that he really wants to do, but, sadly, they are too often variations of the same things that were on previous lists.

Sure, we’ve all been there, but this is from a guy who is famous for hitting his goals at the 95 to 100% level.

Why do people so often miss on resolutions, yet rarely blow their goals in a similar manner? What’s the difference?

Let’s take a look at Joe’s list. He wants to

• stop micromanaging;
• communicate better;
• workout daily;
• lose 20 pounds.

Other than the first item, the list probably duplicates thousands of others. What is the problem?

Have you ever noticed that resolutions are

• phrased in an absolute manner that leaves no room for incremental improvement—an all-or-nothing approach;
• short and not quantified;
• rarely have a viable plan by which to achieve them; and
• often aren’t realistic when measured by the resources (time and/or mental/physical energy) required to accomplish them.

If you set your company or department goals this way do you believe that they would be achieved?

If they aren’t achieved, did you really fail? Not if you believe in ering, as I do.

This year, why not do what Joe’s finally doing? Learn about ering (use the link!), reformulate your resolutions as goals, do a reality test on them to see if they hold up, and show them to someone (feel free to send them to me) for both support and a few accountability nudges during the year.

Do this and see how far you can really go, as well as the difference it makes to your esteem and peace of mind.

My entire career, even when I was a headhunter, I’ve condemned guaranteed pay packages and sign on bonuses, whether stock or cash, because of a passionate belief that people who join just for money/stock have no loyalty and will leave for more money/stock and that what a person did for their previous employer is not a guarantee of what they will do for their next one.

Obviously, my efforts have had no impact whatsoever, outside of my own clients, especially in the executive suite.

The practice is now so common that it’s been named the “golden hello,” a sure sign of broad acceptance.

Such packages are based totally on candidates’ historical actions for another company, frequently in a different business, their interviewing/negotiating skill, charm, and the threat that doing so is the only way to acquire their talent.

Just how much is all this worth? Penny gave its new COO “…a base salary of $750,000, to be reviewed annually starting in 2007, with a cash bonus that could be as much as 150 percent of her salary…stock option awards and restricted stock awards valued at more than $20 million in recognition of forfeited benefits at her former employer, Capital One, as well as a minimum cash bonus for 2006 of $1 million.”

She was fired six months later, because “…Ms. West not being a good fit for the company,” according to Deborah Weinswig, a Citigroup analyst.

Further, “…Ms. West had a severance agreement and that the retailer intended to honor its terms.” and you can bet that her golden goodby will contain a goodly portion of her golden hello.

I understand executive paranoia and the desire not to lose what they already have, but change always involves risk.

Penny isn’t talking, but if the analyst is correct about the fit, why was Ms. West hired in the first place?

Who wrote the job description? Who interviewed her? Who checked her references? Who thought she was such a good fit that it was worth doing anything necessary to land her?

“Who,” of course, is plural, nobody, especially at senior levels, is interviewed by just one person any more.

That’s why I keep telling my clients that, as their companies grow, they must make hiring, including skilled interviewing, a core competency at all levels.