Create psychological safety around missing a stretch target

Stretch goals only produce honest effort when missing them is treated as data, not failure.

Why it works

If missing a stretch goal triggers punishment or shame, the rational response is to sandbag — set conservative targets, avoid risky strategies, and pursue the appearance of compliance rather than the goal. Research on organisational learning consistently shows that psychological safety — the belief that risk-taking will not be punished — is a precondition for the exploratory behaviour that stretch goals require.

How to do it

1. Before setting a stretch goal, explicitly define how shortfall will be treated: as information, not failure.
2. Review missed milestones with curiosity: what did the gap reveal about the method or the target itself?
3. Separate goal-setting conversations from performance evaluations to protect the honesty of both.

Evidence

Edmondson’s research on psychological safety in teams consistently found it a prerequisite for learning behaviour and risk-taking; without it, ambitious targets produce conservative behaviour rather than innovation. (observational)

Psychological safety research is primarily organisational; the individual self-relationship equivalent — self-compassion rather than shame — is supported by separate but parallel evidence.

Sources

• Edmondson (1999), "Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams", Administrative Science Quarterly

Common mistake

Publicly declaring a stretch goal in a context where missing it carries real social or professional cost, then unconsciously pulling back to a safer target.