My last three articles have addressed SMART goals and structuring your goals to be Specific, Measurable and Actionable. In this article I am going to discuss the next aspect of SMART, which is to ensure that your goals are Relevant. I will explain why it is important and provide two techniques that you can use to make sure that at any given point in time you are pursuing those goals most relevant to your success.
Why Relevant? Most versions of SMART do not use relevant. In my opinion those versions neglect two key aspects of goal setting, (1) that we all have more goals than the time we have available and (2) that goals are not strictly independent of one another. Versions of SMART that do not use relevant are silent on these issues, providing no guidance on how to evaluate multiple goals. Therefore, to get the most out of goal setting and improve your chances of success, you not only want to make sure your goals are aligned with your vision and your values, but you want to maximize your time and resources to pursue only those goals most relevant to your long-term success. Value and Effort One way to evaluate multiple goals is to place each goal relative to one another on a matrix that looks at perceived value verses effort. When you look across goals, you want to focus your resources pursuing those goals most relevant to your vision that are low effort and high value. To reinforce, the use of the matrix is a relative process. Hopefully any goal you are looking to achieve has a degree of challenge that will involve substantial effort. The method then, when ranking effort, is simply a comparison between competing goals. For instance, I have a goal to publish a book. Should I write a work of fiction that tells a story of an evil mastermind and his plans to conquer the world or should I write a book that explains 7 key psychological principles that you can use to harness the power of the human mind? Both would be a challenge to write, both will take significant effort, but given my values and my background as an educational psychologist, the book about the human mind will take less effort and have a higher value than the work of fiction. The Pareto Principle A second method for determining which goals are most relevant is to use the Pareto principle, also known as the eighty twenty rule. This takes all goals that are under consideration and asks which are the 20% of your goals that will provide 80% of your results. It is this top 20% that are the goals most relevant to your success. This does not mean to discard the remaining goals, simply to hold them in reserve as you pursue your most relevant goals. Periodically, as you accomplish a goal or new ideas present themselves you will want to revisit the Pareto Principle, dusting off old ideas to determine what to pursue next. And an additional use of the Pareto principle is to help manage your resources in pursuit of those most relevant goals. One option is to commit all of your time and energy to the 20% of your goals that are most relevant. However, another option provides a bit more flexibility, committing 80% of your time to the most relevant goals and 20% of your time to goals not necessarily aligned with your vision. The benefit of this arrangement is that it helps focus the majority of resources on the most relevant goals, yet leaves some room to experiment with new ideas. Maybe I can write my book about an evil mastermind after all, it may just take me a lot longer to complete. The Bottom Line If you are anything like me then your to-do-list expands as you pursue multiple goals in life. You have more ideas than hours in the day. But, every idea is not created equal so you need a mechanism to evaluate your ideas and establish those goals most relevant to your success. Two techniques to evaluate multiple goals are: -1- Use the Value/Effort Matrix: this will compare your goals along two criteria to help ensure you are focused on low effort, high value goals. -2- The Pareto Principle: this lists all your goals and then you select the 20% of goals that will give you 80% of your results. In my next article I will be discussing the last aspect of SMART goals, the importance of ensuring that your goals are Time bound.
About the Author
Richard Feenstra is an educational psychologist who at the age of only seventeen became an expert in throwing hand grenades. Richard enjoys sharing the psychology of decision-making with a vision to help transform the world, one decision at a time. This includes writing about scaffolding, cognitive dissonance, cognitive bias or other keywords he wanted to list here in a feeble attempt to influence search engines.
3 Comments
My last two articles discussed when you want your goals to be Specific and ways to ensure that goals are Measurable. In this article I am going to discuss the third concept in using the acronym SMART, making your goals Actionable. An alternate version of SMART uses the term achievable instead of actionable, but for reasons I will talk about next, I personally find actionable to be more useful.
Achievable I would be remiss to say that it is not good to at least consider the extent to which a goal is achievable. Research has shown that when it comes to goal setting, the most successful individuals are those more capable of accurately making self-assessments of their capabilities and resources available. Those individuals that fail to accurately gauge their abilities or resources are more likely to fail. This may make it seem then, that success is dependent upon setting goals that are achievable. However, there is also research on motivation that supports what Henry Ford was known to have said, “Whether you think you can, or you think you can’t—you’re right.” As it turns out, your individual beliefs regarding if you can or cannot achieve a goal has a significant impact on success, including if you are motivated to even begin working towards a goal in the first place. Individuals with beliefs that support high levels of success set stretch goals, goals that are challenging without the guarantee of achievement. Consider the laundry list of ludicrous, unachievable goals people at one point in time dared attempt. There was circumnavigating the earth in a wooden ship, running a mile in under 4 minutes, landing a man on the moon, me being chosen male model of the year, transplanting a human heart, cloning a sheep and the list continues. With recent advancements in technology it seems like the pace at which the once unachievable is being achieved is accelerating at an unprecedented rate. Maybe I am just watching too many YouTube videos. I admit my personal bias here. It is because of my firm belief in mankind’s ability to achieve the unachievable that I prefer using the term Actionable when structuring my SMART goals. It is within the context of what is actionable that I endeavor to use my decision making skills to accurately assess my abilities and the resources I have available. “Shoot for the moon. Even if you miss, you'll land among the stars.” - Norman Vincent Peale Actionable Instead of achievable, focus on what is actionable, what is your plan for success? For simple or short-term goals it may not take much effort to quickly write down the exact actions required. On the other hand, for complex or long-term goals the plan for success will most likely be more dynamic. Larger goals most often will require breaking them down into smaller sub-goals or establishing milestones. Personally, for my action plans I use Microsoft OneNote, but there are plenty of comparable options on the market you can choose from. The reason I prefer OneNote is because of the flexibility to create a custom format that works for you. In my case, being able to insert links and set up tasks as deep as I like are important features. The degree of detail you want in your action plan will vary. While creating a comprehensive action plan might seem ideal, regardless of the type of goal, when it comes to dynamic or long-term goals, you want to focus most of your effort on near term actions and leave the rest for later. The main reason for this approach is because by definition, dynamic goals ebb and flow, so you are better off not wasting time getting too specific with milestones that are distant. For instance, in my goal to conquer the world my energy is spent developing detail for my first two milestones, leaving the last two as general concepts. Until I have the hidden island, it is only important to know the island needs to be big enough to accommodate a laser. If then something goes wrong with my island plan and I have to switch to a luxury submarine, I benefit from having maintained efficiency and flexibility in the face of a dynamic environment. The Bottom Line Without action a goal is just a dream, therefore when structuring your SMART goals make sure the goal is actionable. To accomplish this, take the end goal and then set intermediate steps or milestones you need to accomplish along the way. After you have determined your milestones, focus on establishing next actions, those actions that will get you to the first milestone. As you progress, the actions you take will provide feedback that you can then use to adjust your plan. If you missed my articles on Specific and Measurable, follow the links. If you want to be notified next week, be sure to sign up for my free newsletter.
About the Author
Richard Feenstra is an educational psychologist and world renowned thumb wrestler. His focus is on judgment and decision making, including topics like cognitive dissonance and confirmation bias. He admires the work of Daniel Kahneman and highly recommends the book "Thinking Fast and Slow". Now that he has talked about himself in the third person and added some nice keywords for search engines, he hopes you enjoyed this blog and sends his best to friends, family, and his readers in their efforts to conquer the world.
In my last article I discussed the SMART format for setting goals and the research behind Specific goals. In this article I want to discuss the next step, how you can ensure Measurable goals to achieve better results. This is arguably my favorite part of goal setting and an area where I think it is easy to get off track by establishing measurements that are less than helpful. In fact, I think in our digital world getting off track is easier than any other time in history.
The most common error I see is establishing measurements that track results, but not performance. I think in order to obtain the best results you should try to use both. The second most common error is allowing the way you decide to measure to drive your goal instead of the goal driving the way you measure. Last, I want to cover the concept of triangulation, discussing when and why you might want to use multiple measurements. Outcomes vs. Performance A simple example is the common goal to lose a specific amount of weight as part of a resolution to live a healthy life. For purposes of the example let's say you determine that you could stand to lose 10 pounds. This provides you a result or outcome that you want to achieve and you can easily monitor how your goal is progressing by using a scale to weigh yourself periodically. Still, establishing this measurement does nothing to help you as it relates to actual performance. A performance measure on the other hand is a particular action you can take that is measurable, and that you have reason to believe will help you achieve results. In trying to lose weight common methods include diet, exercise or taking a supplement. For diet you can track the number of calories you eat each day and for exercise you can track the number of calories burned or the total distance you walk or run. The supplement is a matter of tracking the frequency. These are all actions you can take that are based on some task you need to perform. From these measures or variables you can begin to tie your performance to results. As the general wisdom goes, performance drives results. Measuring What You Manage Speaking of general wisdom, management expert Edward Deming is known for his statement, "What gets measured gets managed." If you set a performance measure to eat less than 2,000 calories a day then it is this aspect of the goal to lose weight that will get managed. And management requires resources, including time and energy. Given we all have a finite amount of resources available, a sneaky trap you want to avoid is allowing a method of measurement to dictate what you will manage. Sticking with the fitness theme, a growing trend is wearable technology that helps measure all sorts of neat statistics. Fitbit is a popular brand of wearable tech, providing a wireless wristband to help track things like heart rate and even the number of flights of stairs you walk up each day. Because of these measurements, it is tempting to fall into the trap of searching for stairs you can climb or trying to develop a fitness routine to use the heart rate monitor. If you are not careful the measurement tool begins to drive what you are managing instead of the other way around. An example that is also a growing trend is the use of analytics in business. I love analytics. I think it is fun to check my websites and see people from all over the world visiting. I can see how long they have stayed on the site, what type of the device they used to connect and sometimes I even get data on age and gender. There are hundreds of analytics available from which I can choose and a mountain of data at my fingertips. It is this mountain of data that becomes the double-edged sword. You want data to help make informed decisions, but you also need to avoid letting analytics be the measure that drives your goals. Instead, you first want to use the data to inform and help establish your goals and only then select the analytics that are the correct measurement tools for the job. It is a subtle, but important difference between measuring what you manage verses managing what you measure. Triangulation Another key to measuring a goal is knowing when and why you should use more than one measurement to gauge success. We have already discussed the need to use both performance and outcome measures, but there is another concept called triangulation. The idea behind triangulation is that like the three sides of a triangle, to use three measurements to help verify and validate outcomes.
Eating less than 2,000 calories a day is performance based, the expected outcome is a loss of weight. What happens then, if after two weeks no weight has been lost? Having the single measurement weight, it would appear no progress is being made. However, if you also were measuring inches around your waist and body fat percentage, the three measurements taken together may tell a different story.
For goals that are short term, simple or low impact the added effort to manage multiple measurements is probably not worth the resources. But, for goals that are long term, complex or of high consequence, using triangulation is something to consider. For the best results, I recommend using three types of data that include both quantitative and qualitative forms of measurement. The Bottom Line A critical part of establishing a goal is to know how you plan to measure success. For better results consider: -1- Make sure to use both performance and outcome measures. -2- Measure what you manage, not the other way around. First establish your goals, then select the correct measurement for the job. -3- For goals that are complex or high consequence and long term, consider using triangulation. Select multiple measurements to validate results and keep you on the right track. To view the initial blog post on "When Setting Specific Goals is a Bad Thing", click here. About the author: Richard Feenstra is a decision researcher, studying and sharing how we make better decisions. He holds a Ph.D. in educational psychology and an M.S. in workforce development. His work experience includes military service, law enforcement, fire prevention and workplace safety. Richard is an international speaker and a recognized expert witness regarding issues of safety and security. Richard teaches a number of online courses, check out his instructor profile.
A little over a year ago I put up a 5 minute video on my YouTube channel that provided a brief overview on how to use a version of SMART goals to better structure your goals for success. The positive response has been terrific, so after receiving multiple requests to expand on the topic, I decided to write a five part series, starting with discussing the research behind when and why goals need to be specific, including when setting specific goals is a bad idea.
If you are not familiar with SMART, it is an acronym you can use to help structure your goals to make sure they are Specific, Measurable, Actionable, Relevant, and Time Bound. There are other variations of the SMART format with the 'A' standing for achievable or the 'R' for realistic, but for reasons I will explain later, I find actionable and relevant more useful. (original video) Like most people I enjoy a tasty scoop of ice cream, especially Oreo blizzards, but what few people realize is how dangerous a treat ice cream has become. First there is the issue of obesity, second there are higher crime rates, third there is the loss of life due to a rise in the number of drowning deaths, and finally, as more ice cream is sold there is an increase in forest fires. Given these indisputable facts, I need you to support my vision of an ice cream free world. While banning ice cream trucks from entering your neighborhood may sound far-fetched, when it comes to problem solving, the above paragraph describes a common issue of misunderstanding the difference between correlation and causation. This misunderstanding can influence our decisions, sometimes with serious consequences that ripple throughout a community. Correlation When two things are related, but one does not cause the other then it is correlation, not causation. Usually this means the two are in some way related to a third factor, but not always. If you have a big enough pile of data, you will even find relationships that are purely coincidence, like the strong relationship between the sale of margarine and divorce in the state of Maine. With the sale of ice cream a third factor is weather. When it is hot outside people buy more ice cream, they are more likely to go for a swim, and there is a general increase in people out and about enjoying the weather, helping improve conditions for crime to take place as well as the dry conditions associated with forest fires. When everyone is snowed in, the trees and grass are wet and it is time for a marathon session of Netflix. To my knowledge no one has yet drowned while watching Netflix, but I guess technically it could happen. A note of caution, there is a growing trend in the digital world called “data dredging”. This is using analytics to sift through mountains of data hoping to find useful relationships. Instead of a problem in search of a solution, dredging data is a solution looking to identify a problem. This does not mean correlations are without value. In fact, correlation is a vital part of helping us move to the next step, the discovery of causation. Causation Unlike correlation, to claim one thing actually causes another thing to happen means you need to be able to demonstrate an actual cause and effect relationship, preferably a strong relationship. Arguably the gold standard of cause and effect is physics, but for an example I will use the pharmaceutical industry. To make the claim that a particular drug causes a certain effect, such as lowering your cholesterol or growing hair, the FDA requires that pharmaceutical companies support those claims, putting the drug through a rigorous, four phase, twelve step process that takes roughly 12 years. The process is strictly regulated using control groups and clinical trials to test the drug, making sure that X causes Y and that the drug is safe (relatively speaking). The acceptable error rate can go as high as 5% for some drugs. This means that the clinical trials prove that there is a 95% chance the drug does actually cause hair to grow. Other drugs are held to an even stricter standard, requiring proof up to 99% effectiveness. Back to ice cream. What about ice cream and obesity? While it may seem like common sense that eating ice cream causes weight gain, the fact is that we don’t yet know the true strength of the relationship. If we look at the sale of ice cream, there is actually an inverse relationship with weight. People gain weight in the winter when sales are low and lose weight in the warm summer months when more ice cream is being consumed. While this suggests ice cream might be the new diet food, knowing about correlation you can avoid drawing a causal conclusion. Instead, recent research on the subject has been looking at different types of sugars used in making a wide range of sweet foods we tend to enjoy. What scientists have discovered is that the hypothalamus, which is an area of the brain that regulates appetite, reacts differently when we consume foods with fructose instead of glucose. This has researchers speculating that eating high fructose foods, such as ice cream, may result in people not feeling full, so they continue to eat. This theory proves difficult however when we start considering apples and other natural fruits also contain fructose, not just ice cream and chocolate cake.
As you can see, causation is difficult to prove, especially the more variables that are involved. No wonder it takes 12 years just to prove a pill causes hair to grow. The Bottom Line Personally, I do suspect that researchers are onto something with this whole fructose thing, but this article is not really about discussing the relationship between ice cream and forest fires or obesity. Instead, I want to reinforce the major difference between correlation and causation. When it comes to your ability to be a better problem solver, understanding this difference is critical. In the real world, away from laboratories and clinical trials, on the news, in boardrooms and coffee shops, everywhere you go, you will hear claims that X causes Y. From politics to the weather, from the stock market to personal relationships it is human nature to try and explain things, to create stories that make sense. As you hear these stories or as you create the story, try to keep in mind one thing, that correlation is not causation. References Huff, D. (1993). How to Lie with Statistics (Reissue ed.). W. W. Norton & Company. Silver, N. (2015). The Signal and the Noise: Why So Many Predictions Fail--but Some Don’t. Penguin Books. Stanovich, K. E. (2012). How to Think Straight About Psychology (10th Edition) (10 ed.). Pearson. Vigen, T. (2015). Spurious Correlations. Hachette Books. About the author: Richard Feenstra is an educational psychologist with a focus on innovation, problem solving and productivity. His work experience includes military service, law enforcement, fire prevention and workplace safety. Richard is also a recognized expert witness regarding issues of safety and security. Richard holds an M.S. in workforce development and a Ph.D. in learning and technology. Temptation can be tough. Whether tempted to eat an extra piece of chocolate or go ahead and take a little out of savings, we could all use a little help, and that is exactly what researchers Dilip Soman and Amar Cheema explored. In two experiments, one providing scrumptious chocolate and a second financial advice, Soman and Cheema found that if you partition a resource, it makes a significant difference. This “partitioning effect”, causes you to make an extra decision that normally you would not need to make and this can be enough to help conquer temptation. In the first experiment they provided participants 6 pieces of Godiva chocolate to be eaten over a period of one week. Those participating were only informed that the experiment was a taste test and that in one week they were to turn in their surveys. Half of the participants were provided a box with the pieces inside unwrapped (aggregated). The other half received boxes with each piece individually wrapped in foil (partitioned). This small difference had a dramatic effect. Within the first two days, 82% of those in the unwrapped condition had gobbled up all their tasty treats, while only 45% had finished in the individually wrapped condition. Almost twice as much chocolate consumed in two days! In a second experiment, 146 workers in rural India agreed to participate in a study in exchange for free financial advice. At the time of the experiment the workers were paid 670 rupees (US$15.50) every Saturday and the average saved each week was .75% or roughly 5 rupees. Financial planners set a target goal for families to save either 40 or 80 rupees per week. Participants were separated into several groups, and within these groups over the next 14 weeks savings would be placed in either a single envelope (non-partitioned) or in two different envelopes (partitioned). While in both conditions savings rose dramatically, when two envelopes were used families saved 48% more (377 rupees vs. 230 rupees over the duration of the experiment). Application The next time you find yourself struggling with motivation, take some time to reflect on your goal and consider if partitioning might work. By partitioning out a resource, whether food, cigarettes, money, etc. research shows it can help to create a psychological trigger. While the effort may seem insignificant, the need to make a decision to go ahead and open that second bag of potato chips or dip into the account that was set aside to for that Mediterranean cruise, is enough to make you think twice. It seems that partitioning helps provide a kind of rule or barrier that in order to continue presents a small, yet significant dilemma to help keep you committed to achieving your goals. References
Cheema, A., & Soman, D. (2008). The effect of partitions on controlling consumption. Journal of Marketing Research, 45(6), 665-675. Retrieved from http://journals.ama.org/doi/abs/10.1509/jmkr.45.6.665 Heath, C., & Heath, D. (2013). Decisive: How to Make Better Choices in Life and Work (1 ed.). Crown Business. Soman, D., & Cheema, A. (2011). Earmarking and partitioning: increasing saving by low-income households. Journal of Marketing Research, 48(SPL), S14-S22. Retrieved from http://journals.ama.org/doi/abs/10.1509/jmkr.48.SPL.S14 Selling safety is no easy task, especially when it comes to a new method, idea or product. Resources in any organization are finite, resulting in tough decisions on how to best allocate those resources between initiatives. With this in mind, one way to improve your chances of success is to consider each of five key traits of an innovation and their influence on how resources are ultimately allocated. The key traits include;
Relative Advantage The most important aspect of relative advantage is the perception of advantage over alternatives at a given moment in time, not necessarily an objective, measurable advantage. While factors such as costs can often be quantified, it is not as easy to precisely calculate things such as functionality, comfort, reliability, frequency, risk or the value of public relations. In selling safety, timing is important because of the psychological principle of “the availability effect” and it’s impact on how we estimate probabilities and cycles of risk. Empirical research demonstrates a pattern of overestimation and underestimation dependent upon recent events. If a fire has taken place recently, the perception of relative advantage of a new idea for reducing the risk of fire will be higher than prior to the fire. I’m not suggesting to wait for disaster before trying to secure resources to fund your initiatives, but to consider how the availability effect influences the perception of relative advantage. Compatibility Every organization has a unique culture and this culture can influence the extent to which a particular innovation will succeed. A simple example is Volvo verses Ferrari. The core values of Volvo make introducing new safety initiatives compatible with the culture. On the other hand, even though certainly Ferrari is also safety conscious, their focus is on speed, handling and a sporty image. This means introducing a way to improve safety will also need to balance the compatibility of the initiative with the culture of the organization. Simplicity A better mousetrap may indeed be cheaper and more effective at catching mice, but if the trap is more complex than existing alternatives it will often be rejected. In today’s environment a common mistake I have seen are surveillance or alarm systems that offer too many bells and whistles. There is a balance between a “feature rich” system providing a relative advantage and the perception the system is overly complex. It is better to focus on promoting the handful of features that will actually be used than trying to explain the entire range of options available. Triability An innovation that can be tried on a limited basis prior to making a larger commitment is more likely to be successful. A few examples are the automatic external defibrillator (AED), Segway or a new system for computer-assisted dispatch (CAD). There is a large difference between these tools in the degree to which decision-makers can try them before they buy them. Pilot programs most often target the end user and not the executives that will actually decide whether or not to allocate resources. At the end of the day this means the Segway will be an easier sell than the AED, which will win out over the CAD system. If presented with the opportunity, decision-makers can try the Segway, but without a real patient the AED is more of a demonstration than real world trial and the CAD system is also more of a limited demo than trial. Visibility Similar to triability, the degree to which an innovation can be observed influences success. Innovations that are highly visible are more likely to be adopted. Once again, the Segway is more visible to decision-makers than the AED, which is more visible than the CAD system. Innovations that are visible help to generate discussion, while those working behind the scenes find it more difficult to gain traction. Resources will tend to support visible innovations. Application When it comes to getting support for any new idea, method or product, the reality is that you most often are competing with other departments for resources, such as marketing or engineering. To give your ideas the best chance to succeed, consider not only how the above traits influence decision-makers regarding new safety initiatives, but also how they influence the initiatives being presented by these other departments. Play into the strengths of your initiatives and try and improve upon the weaknesses. If you know your idea has relative advantage, make sure to leverage this point. If the innovation is lacking in triability or visibility, focus on ways to get your idea noticed, find ways to expose executives to the often behind scenes world of safety. References Kahneman, D. (2013). Thinking, Fast and Slow (Reprint ed.). Farrar, Straus and Giroux. Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of Innovations, 5th Edition (5th ed.). Free Press. Taleb, N. N. (2010). The Black Swan: Second Edition: The Impact of the Highly Improbable: With a new section: “On Robustness and Fragility” (Incerto) (2 ed.). Random House Trade Paperbacks. The “anchoring effect” is a well established psychological principle that often influences our judgments. Research has shown that even when we are aware information is not accurate, it still provides an anchor from which we adjust. The end result is an inaccurate decision tied to the anchor. To learn how to use the anchoring effect, here is a 2-minute video. P.S. If you are reading this, you have just been anchored. When faced with a dilemma "The Rubber Band Model" is designed to help a person choose between two options. The model consists of envisioning being stuck between two rubber bands, both stretched to their limits from either side of the dilemma. One rubber band is holding you from moving away, while the other is trying to pull you closer. While in reality both rubber bands are equally holding or pulling, the exercise is to ask your self, "What is holding me?" and "What is pulling me?” For example, if the dilemma were changing careers you would ask, what is about a career change that is pulling you in that direction and what are the things holding you to your current career?
The model is most effective when the dilemma or problem is between making a change or staying with the way things are currently. If you were living in Minnesota, the model can be useful deciding whether to stay or move out of the state, but it will not be as helpful choosing between Florida and California. For that, you may want to look at some of the other tools provided when developing your solution. Adapted From: Krogerus, M., & Tschäppeler, R. (2012). The Decision Book: 50 Models for Strategic Thinking (1 ed.). W. W. Norton & Company. A problem has been identified, someone stands up in front of a flipchart or whiteboard and the rest of us throw out as many ideas as possible. In theory, the ideas generated represent an exhaustive list of creative and innovative solutions. This is the essence of “brainstorming”. And while brainstorming can be an effective technique for generating solutions, there are a few common issues that can surface, such as the subtle danger of groupthink or the power of the initial suggestion guiding or influencing all subsequent ideas. When brainstorming, or trying to solve a problem in general, if you want to help avoid some of the more common traps, consider adding a little structure to the discussion by asking the following questions: |
AuthorsRichard Feenstra is an educational psychologist, with a focus on judgment and decision making.
(read more) Bobby Hoffman is the author of "Hack Your Motivation" and a professor of educational psychology at the University of Central Florida.
(read more) Archives
April 2023
Categories |