In reply to mattrm & biscuit:
Personally I think Dr. Williams overstates the case against outcome goals. This has come up before - see also here and the replies to her post:
http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=386408&v=1#x5607338
Yes, you frequently see people get demotivated by only setting outcome goals that are out of their control and then not achieving them, but equally, only setting process goals can lead people to get equally demotivated, stuck in endless cycles of setting and completing training goals but never actually going out and achieving anything concrete because there are always reasons why they can't.
Outcome and process goals serve different functions. Yes, process goals are really important as they tell you how you are going to achieve something, but outcome goals tell you where you're trying to get to and are important as well.
While 'climb 7a' IS an outcome goal, it is fundamentally different to outcome goals like 'win the boulder comp' as the former is mostly within your own control, while the latter is to a large extent out of your own control. (the
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Locus_of_control being either internal or external, if you want psychologist speak)
> A number of factors will impinge on these goals – suddenly an elite climber moves into your area and starts whizzing up the aggregate ladder; whenever you try to climb a F7a its too reachy/ too hot/ you’re tired; you keep dieting but those pounds just aren’t falling off; or its raining / you’re stiff and hungry/ a bee stings you halfway up/ a hold snaps.
Two things. Firstly, when it comes to 'climb 7a', if you fall off you can try it again. As long as you don't specify specific routes, this works for onsight goals too - indeed any sort of game where you get basically an infinite number of goes and you only need to succeed once.
Secondly, the factors she suggests for failing to climb 7a are excuses rather than factors, and if you think tactically and combine it with trying again after an initial failure, they *are* mostly within your control.
too hot - get up earlier, wait until its not in the sun, try it in february not july etc.
you're tired - come back rested. have a nap through the hottest part of the day. maybe your warm up was too intense. maybe it wasn't intense enough, etc.
too reachy - find a less reachy route, use smaller intermediate holds, just climb up to them, etc.
stung by a bee - MTFU we're rock climbing now.
etc. etc. etc.
Get into the habit of thinking tactically and you can get these factors working *for* you not against you. Good tactical climbers know that there is a window between 3pm when the sun comes off the crag and 4pm when it greases up, and have gone up, put the clips in, and brushed & chalked the holds at 2pm so they can set off on redpoint 1 at 3.05 (with an option of redpoint 2 at 3.55). They have got the sequence wired, their warm up has been perfectly executed, they are fresh after a rest day, etc.
Yes, sometimes thinking tactically might involve coming back at a different time, but that is why we set *goals* to constantly remind ourselves of what we want to achieve. My point is that we get into the habit of thinking tactically *because* in the outside environment, there *are* a lot of external factors that might affect performance, because we have to hold ourselves to account for failing to achieve outcome goals, we think about ways of taking responsibility for them.
> What happens when you fail on successive occasions to reach your outcome based goal? You feel disappointed, despondent even, and before you know it, your motivation begins to slip.
Perhaps, but I prefer Dave Mac's view - redefine what failure means. Temporary failure is a necessary, and inevitable, initial phase of any worthwhile endeavour. Failure is the necessary feedback that tells you that your current approach isn't working. Yes, repeated failure is demotivating especially if it leads to a feeling that your goals are unachievable, and here the trick is to set more realistic intermediate goals *in conjunction with* process goals that are formulated to get you to your target. If you are continually trying and failing to achieve your short term goals, then it's a sign that your goals are unrealistic, not that you shouldn't be setting goals at all.
My beef with the main thrust of that blog post is that without *any* outcome goals (not even implicit ones that most of us keep in our heads even if we don't write them down), we have no idea of what it is we want to achieve, we just drift along with no idea whether or not something is working. A problem with process goals is they don't give us intrinsic feedback - outcome goals tell you when your training plan is working because you start achieving them. When you don't achieve them, it's a sign you need to revise the training plan. I'm sure it's possible to drift along ticking every process goal you set but still fail to improve at climbing because your training plan is wrong, but the worst bit is that without any objective measures of the thing you want to get better at (ie. actually climbing) you don't *know* it's wrong.
And lets face it, who ever got inspired by process goals like 'lead session 2 times this week' - outcome goals tap into the reasons we want to climb harder in the first place - climb El Cap, redpoint Raindogs, onsight Right Wall, climb the soaring crag classic you walked under your first day of climbing and thought 'never in a million years'.
outcome goals & process goals - both important. Sorry for the rant.