Same Goal, Three Teams, Completely Different Outcomes: What Neuroscience Taught Me

The Setup: One Goal, Three Very Different Teams

It was late October, and I was brainstorming ways to lighten my team's supervisor's workload. You see, each year around the holidays, the workload doesn’t change, but we add in all the holiday hustle and bustle, and I worry about burnout. When our brains are overloaded, managing social obligations, work tasks, and personal logistics can lead to prolonged stress. The best way to manage that is to plan and create space for less work or decision-making. I had this great idea to set a goal to help the team work ahead, starting in November. In theory, this would allow the team to avoid one of their routine tasks in the last two weeks of the year.  In addition to less work at the end of the year, I incentivized this goal with a monetary reward.  This is a team goal, so everyone on the team must meet it to get it. I wanted to create unity in the goal for a greater sense of team. I thought I had considered all the factors.....but not so much.

The Results: Why Context Trumps Content

Team 1 (Success): This team’s leader started by asking the team if extra work before the last two weeks of the year would allow them to have a more enjoyable holiday season- a buy-in conversation. They had weekly meetings with updates on progress and who needed help staying on track. They had momentum every step of the way. By asking for their input first, the leader activated their brain's reward centers around autonomy and status.

Team 2 (Vacation Conflicts): This leader missed the opportunity to engage the team. This leader didn’t ask the team in advance whether the reward was worth the work. For this team, vacations were when they wanted less stress, not at the end of the year. This team had no buy-in and no intention of meeting this goal. They enjoyed their vacations, and that is wonderful. The leader was disappointed until she realized this was the goal that she wanted for them, not the goal they wanted for themselves. People need autonomy and to do what is best for them. When we ignore this basic human need, even well-intentioned goals can feel like impositions rather than opportunities. In this case, it wasn’t the leaders' goal for the team that mattered most.  

Team 3 (Staffing Crisis): This team was down two supervisors for an extended period. There was absolutely no way that this team could have met the goal. This goal only created unintended anxiety and competing thoughts for that leader. I am sure this added stress was causing her to lose sleep. She wanted to please me and meet the goal, but she couldn’t bring herself to address this with the team, since they were already stressed about meeting the basic metrics, much less working ahead. What I didn't realize was that I'd triggered her brain's threat detection system - the same neural pathways that fire when we face physical danger.

The Lesson: When Goals Backfire

As we look at the three teams above, we see one goal, with rewards, but three very different teams. Leaders should look at the big picture when assigning goals and realize that one goal does not fit all. In fact, sometimes the kindest thing is NOT giving a goal.  Next time you set a stretch goal, consider the following insights:

• Is this the right time?

• Does the team really need this stretch goal?

• Set up campaigns to ensure the momentum is strong.

• Encourage the team to find the benefits with your influence and guidance.

Before You Set That Next Stretch Goal.....

As the New Year approaches, what stretch goals are you considering for your teams in 2026? Before you announce it, ask yourself: Am I about to create momentum…or accidentally trigger a threat response?

Shared Goals Succeed