1) Agenda 2030 - Activity traps (full version in English)
One of the most common mistakes that school teachers commit every day is to tell the pupils only what they are going to do, i.e. what activities that are planned, instead of describing what the goal is, i.e which skills/knowledge that they are expected to achieve.
These teachers have fallen in the ACTIVITY TRAP, an expression I will use onwards for all the statements that pretend to be goals but are in reality only descriptions of activities. The ACTIVITY TRAP, here, means that the teacher assumes - wrongly - that if the pupils carry out X and/or Y activities they will achieve the goal more or less automatically.
This article is about this issue. Its importance is confirmed by the many investigations that show that primary school pupils spend half of their school time trying to GUESS what the teachers want them to learn.
This article will deal with the difference between DOING something (activity) and ACHIEVING something (goal) and to show how important it is to be able to differentiate between these two.
I also wish to show how we all, not only teachers, often tend to believe that an activity in itself automatically can lead to a certain goal. Even the Agenda 2030 - one of the most important and probably also most well known goal documents of our time - is partly committing the same error. Which I will show at the end of this article.
An easy way to differentiate between these two kinds of statements is to consider that an activity normally describes an expression in motion like washing clothes, laying a table, repairing a bike, etc. whereas a goal always describes - or should describe - an expression that “does not move” like cleaned clothes, laid table, repaired bike etc., in other words something that is ”ready” or has already been “done”.
Notice though that there are no activities without a goal! All humans activities have a goal or at least a purpose - with a less pretentious word - even when the goal/purpose is maybe not always clearly spelt out.
If for example I am lying in the hammock reading a book there can be several purposes for this activity, even if it is not explicitly stated. For example, to relax, to distress, to learn new things from that book, to read that book, to get away from other people etc.
If somebody moves from point A to point B there might be several different purposes for this activity, even if it is not explicitly stated. For example, to go and fetch something at point B, to get some physical activity, to test a new means of transport, to see how fast I can get from A to B, to avoid certain people etc.
Human activity always has a purpose, even in those cases when it is being denied or not explicitly stated. Yes, sometimes the very activity itself can SEEM TO be the purpose. To carry it out might be a purpose in itself. But it is then equally important that it appears in the statement itself that it is the activity itself that is the goal. For example like this:
- Not later than 1 June 2026 the activity X has been carried out.
Although it had been far better if the underlying goal had been indicated in the statement, because then it would have been possible, later on, to assess to which extent this activity had really achieved the underlying goal. The statement would then have looked more like a correct goal statement, if the end result would have been explicitly stated.
Most activities we are carrying out - even those we are carrying out with the clear and explicit purpose to achieve a certain goal - do not always achieve what we are hoping for. It is a very common misconception to believe that only by carrying out an activity it will automatically lead to the goal.
Look for example at this fake goal:
- Not later that 1 May 2025 all parents have been informed about the new rules.
This statement might look like a goal but is nothing more than an activity (to inform the parents) or a task, but not a goal. The activity in itself probably has an underlying goal. Which is probably this:
-Before 1 May 2025 all school parents know about the new rules.
Which of course cannot be guaranteed only by the information activities, because even if the parents before a specific date have received written information in their mail boxes or been informed orally during a meeting or in individual chats etc. - all these information activities do not necessarily mean that the parents know about the new rules! They might very well have received information about the new rules but did not read it, or if they did, they might not have understood it; or they might not have listened or understood the information, if it was given to them during a meeting or in an individual chat, provided of course they attended the meeting or that specific chat.
If this was the real goal with these information activities (which it probably was, although not explicitly stated), a correct goal statement should have looked like this:
- Not later than 1 August 2025 all school parents know about the new rules.
In this sentence the goal is explicitly stated. It is now possible to use different activities in trying to achieve this goal - e.g written information in the mail boxes, oral information at a meeting or in an individual chat, or a combination of several different activities etc.
NOTICE! the activities are methods in trying to achieve the goal, not goals in themselves. Of course, the goal statement also needs to be clarified with goal criteria and/or word explanations so that it is clear what the words in the statement really mean.
The goal is achieved when all parents…
1. ….on request can explain what the new rules are all about
2. .… have made comments on the new rules.
3. ….have asked questions about the new rules.
Word explanation: with “all” are here meant “those parents who were reachable”.
During many years I travelled around in Sweden organising and conducting recurrent training for teachers and schools principals in the art of interpreting and clarifying educational goals with special emphasis on the difference between activities and goals.
In order to illustrate the problem during my courses I would always tell a self experienced story that maybe could clarify how difficult it really is to distinguish between goals and activities. If you attended any of my courses, I am sure you will remember this story.
The Story. During a couple of years in the 90s I lived with my two adult children in a big 5 room flat. Since we did not need all these rooms we rented out one of them to a young student. Vidar was a clever and ambitious young man. He studied law and most of the time was sitting in his room with his nose over his books.
Since we now were four persons in this big flat - me, my two kids and Vidar - we agreed to take turns in cleaning the flat once a week, on Saturdays. We also agreed that cleaning the flat meant vacuum cleaning of all rooms and swipe all surfaces with a wet cloth. Normally that would take around 1–2 hours.
On the Saturday, when it was Vidar’s turn to clean, I though that maybe after all it was best to remind him. So I knocked gently on his door: - Hello Vidar! You wont forget that it is your turn today to clean the flat? - Sure, replied Vidar and continued his reading.
When the afternoon was about to turn into evening and it was getting dark, I got a bit worried and knocked again on Vidar’s door to remind him. I also pointed out that in my opinion it was more difficult to carry out the cleaning the darker it became. After that I went down to our local supermarket to buy some food.
When about 30 minutes later I came back to the flat, Vidar was still sitting in his room with his nose over the books. Now I got really worried and reminded him that today was actually HIS turn to clean the flat. - That is precisely what I just did, he replied. While you were out!
I could hardly believe my ears. My first thought was that Vidar could probably not distinguish between goals and activities. Yes, he had obviously used the vacuum cleaner! That I could see from the badly winded up cables he had thrown into the wardrobe together with the vacuum cleaner. Apparently he believed that the goal of cleaning was to put on the vacuum cleaner, take a few swings around the floor and then shut it down again.
But the goal of using the vacuum cleaner is not only to turn it on, make a few moves over the floor, and then switch it off but to get rid of the dirt and dust on the floor. To vacuum cleaning is an activity or a method, not a goal. The goal is not about what you do but about the end result of what you are doing - in this case dust and dirty free floors.
Since Vidar was a smart and intelligent person, I also suspected that he knew all this. Maybe, after all, it was MY fault ?! I had asked him to carry out an activity (to clean), not described to him what was supposed to be the goal of that activity - dust and dirt free floors. So what the smart and intelligent Vidar had done was maybe to take advantage of the fact that I had asked him to carry out an activity, not described to him the goal of that activity.
Why did I tell you this story? Because this is one of the most common faults that teachers in schools are committing: they often describe an activity to the pupils, but often forget to tell them what they are supposed to achieve - the goal that is the end result.
In my family nowadays we always use the expression “To do a Vidar” when we want to point out that somebody has failed to distinguish between a goal and an activity.
The same mistakes are committed by thousands of projects plans that each year are being produced in our or many other countries by national, regional or municipal organs. They all contain lots of activities but rarely any clear goals or expected end results.
As I pointed out already in the beginning of this article, a correct goal statement describes WHAT you want to achieve, not HOW you want to achieve it.
To only do or implement something (a re-organisation, a study visit, a training, a revision), to build something (a new factory), to develop something (the communication with other companies), to improve something (the transport system), to increase something (the participation in the decision making processes), to decrease something (the carbon oxide emissions) - are ALL examples of ambitions, activities, tasks, actions, interventions but not of real goals.
Only if the activity describes “a time framed desirable future state of affairs” the statement can be accepted as a correct goal statement.
This can also be done if the goal statement includes some kind of quantitative level such as e.g. ”2/3 of the staff”, ”50% of the expenses” etc., or, some kind of quality feature e.g. “ well functioning”, “according to decided criteria”, etc.
Look now at the following 4 examples here below and pick out those you think are real goals - without looking at the key¹ at the end of the article.
EXERCISE:
1. Not later than 2025 our company will introduce a new working scheme.
2. Not later than 2026 the scheme is operating according to decided criteria.
3. Before 1/6 2026 all staff has done the word processing training.
4. Not later than 1/1 2026 all staff can master basic word processing.
Here is another example. In this case the goal statement is correct but the goal criteria contain several activity traps:
– Not later than 1 May 2025 most employees are happy with their work at our company.
The goal is achieved when starting from 1 January,….
1. we spend 2 kick-off-days in a cosy guest house in the country side.
2. we have done some physical activities together on working hours.
3. we are allowed to finish work on Fridays at 3 pm.
4. we have had at least 1 staff party per month.
One possible explanation why these mistakes are so common is probably due to the fact that we all want to believe that the activities that we are carrying out automatically will lead to the goal. Correct goal criteria for this last example could instead have been, e.g.
- The goal is achieved when 60% of the staff in a written anonymous survey on 2 May has declared that they are happy with the work at our company.
Let’s now look at another goal and its goal criteria:
- Not later than 3 pm each Saturday Eva’s room is clean and in order
Goal criteria A are correct formulated but goal criteria B contain again the activity trap, i.e. a strong belief that the activities themselves will automatically lead to achieving the goal. One could also put it like this: Goal criteria A are showing that, when the criteria A are achieved, the room has achieved the goal, i.e. is clean and in order. Whereas the goal criteria B are rather criteria showing that some activities to this end have started and are still going on. Which of course does not necessarily mean that they are completed, and less probable that the goal has been achieved. They hence express a process and about a process the only thing you can say (evaluate) is if it is going in the right or wrong direction, not if it has achieved any state of affairs.
*****************************************************************
NOTICE!! Since a correct goal statement has to describe “a time framed desirable future state affairs” both the goal statement AND the appending goal criteria must express a state of affairs, an end result that is “not moving” but”standing still”.
****************************************************************
AGENDA 2030
Now a few words about how the goals are formulated in the Agenda 2030. Unfortunately some of them suffer from the same weakness - the activity trap. The problem - which also increases the confusion - is that several of the 17 development goals - as they are called - are not describing a state of affairs but only a general direction, ambitions, tasks, activities and similar, because many of them are using expressions that are “moving” which can be seen in the list below (“moving verbs” = italics made by me/JAH).
Goal 1. End poverty in all its forms everywhere. Goal 2. End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture. Goal 3. Ensure healthy lives and promote well being for all at all ages. Goal 4. Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all. Goal 5. Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls. Goal 6. Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all. Goal 7. Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all. Goal 8. Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all. Goal 9. Build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialisation and foster innovation. Goal 10. Reduce inequality within and among countries. Goal 11. Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable Goal 12. Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns. Goal 13. Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts. Goal 14. Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development. Goal 15. Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss. Goal 16. Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels. Goal 17. Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalise the Global Partnership for Sustainable Development.
The real problem with some of these statements is that they contain expressions that are not indicating a final state of affairs but some kind of “movement“ which means that they are not expressing an end result but rather a process. And, as I said before, about a process the ONLY thing you can say, when assessing it, is that it is moving in the right or wrong direction. Nothing else. You cannot assess if it has achieved its end goal since it was never clearly stated what the final goal was.
Serious clarifications are therefore needed if these “goals” are going to be used to guide the different national projects and actions and in due time also constitute the basis for the final evaluation of the global and national end results.
Some of these clarifications, however, have been added by the Agenda 2030 in the following way: to each one of these 17 “goals” have been added separate targets, in total 169. The problems with these targets are however the same as with some of the 17 “goals”. Some of the targets are meant to be subgoal but are in reality nothing else but tasks or activities. And as said before, about the activities we can only assess if the direction is right or wrong, not if it has achieved any goal.
Most targets however also have their own indicators, in total 230 of them. These indicators are finally meant to describe the expected end results, i.e they correspond to what in this article are called goal criteria. This can be clearly seen when the 17 “goals” are summarised in the English Wikipedia list ² where at least the first 7 “goals” are summarised as nouns i.e. as a state of affairs and not as a “movement”:
(1) No Poverty, (2) Zero Hunger, (3) Good Health and Well-being, (4) Quality Education, (5) Gender Equality, (6) Clean Water and Sanitation, (7) Affordable and Clean Energy.³
As planned, the indicator framework was fully reviewed at the 51st session of the United Nations Statistical Commission in 2020. It will be reviewed again in 2025. At the 51st session of the Statistical Commission (held in New York City from 3–6 March 2020) a total of 36 changes to the global indicator framework were proposed for the Commission’s consideration.
The United Nations Statistics Division (UNSD) website provides a current official indicator list which includes all updates until the 51st session Statistical Commission in March 2020. Further information: List of Sustainable Development Goal targets and indicators
E-mail: jahedenquist@gmail.com
Web: https://jahedenquist.wixsite.com/2017en
NOTICE! You can read more about all these things if you download my free manual “How to formulate clear goals” by clicking here!
PS. If you wish to send me comments and/or questions regarding this article or regarding my manual I promise I will reply, if you send them to: jahedenquist@gmail.com DS.
________________________________________________________________
FOOTNOTES
________________________________________________________________
Here is the KEY:
1. a) to introduce a new working scheme is an activity or task, not a goal.
1. b) that a scheme is operating according to decided criteria is a goal.
1. c) to participate in training before a specific date is an activity that does not guarantee that the staff who underwent training has reached the goal.
1. d) to be able to master a specific skill before a specific date is a skill that can be achieved. Hence a goal. 2.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sustainable_Development_Goals
3. Strangely enough this has not been done in the Swedish list corresponding to the English Wikipedia list I just quoted. In the Swedish list expressions/ verbs are used that indicate tasks and activities, not goals. Check this link: https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Globala_målen.
________________________________________________________________
