So first, we have to make sure we're not shortchanging ourselves when we're setting goals. If the goal is no stretch for us, there's no point to it. For example, if I set a goal to run 2 km every day and I already run 1.8 km every day, I'm not challenging myself. Worse, I'm probably boring myself. A much better goal might be to participate in and finish a particular race. That would be more of a challenge, and it's challenge that keeps us interested.
Step 5: Initiate actions that support your feelings of abundance and success. Here, the key word is actions. I've been calling this acting as if or thinking from the end and acting that way. Put your body into a gear that pushes you toward abundance and feeling successful. Act on those passionate emotions as if the abundance and success you seek is already here. Speak to strangers with passion in your voice. Answer the telephone in an inspired way. Do a job interview from the place of confidence and joy. Read the books that mysteriously show up, and pay close attention to conversation that seem to indicate you're being called to something new.

Step 7: Monitor your emotions as a guidance system for your connection to the universal mind of intention. Strong emotions such as passion and bliss are indications that you're connected to Spirit, or inspired, if you will. When you're inspired, you activate dormant forces, and the abundance you seek in any form comes streaming into your life. When you're experiencing low-energy emotions of rage, anger, hatred, anxiety, despair, and the like, that's a clue that while your desires may be strong, they're completely out of sync with the field of intention. Remind yourself in these moments that you want to feel good, and see if you can activate a thought that supports your feeling good.
The hard choices — what we most fear doing, asking, saying — are very often exactly what we need to do. How can we overcome self-paralysis and take action? Tim Ferriss encourages us to fully envision and write down our fears in detail, in a simple but powerful exercise he calls "fear-setting." Learn more about how this practice can help you thrive in high-stress environments and separate what you can control from what you cannot.
There has been a lot of research conducted looking at the link between achieving desired goals, changes to self-efficacy and integrity and ultimately changes to subjective well-being.[12] Goal efficacy refers to how likely an individual is to succeed in achieving their goal. Goal integrity refers to how consistent one's goals are with core aspects of the self. Research has shown that a focus on goal efficacy is associated with well-being factor happiness (subjective well-being) and goal integrity is associated with the well-being factor meaning (psychology).[13] Multiple studies have shown the link between achieving long-term goals and changes in subjective well-being; most research shows that achieving goals that hold personal meaning to an individual increases feelings of subjective well-being.[14][15][16]

Welcome to the club! Great question. There are any number of reasons why we may be unable to achieve a goal by the deadline. Your instincts are on the mark. When you find yourself in a situation where you are unable to achieve your goal by the initial date you set for yourself, revisit the goal. If it is a big goal, break the goal down into smaller goals and set deadlines that are realistic to achieve.


Assess why you're slipping: are you not sticking to your plan, or is your timeline unrealistic? If it's the latter, adjust your plan to something more reasonable. If it's the former, work on dedicating yourself to sticking to your target. Sometimes our plans are thwarted by outside influences, about which there's not much you can do; simply reorient yourself and continue onward. Keep in mind that failure is a part of progress.
Some coaches recommend establishing specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bounded (SMART) objectives, but not all researchers agree that these SMART criteria are necessary.[6] The SMART framework does not include goal difficulty as a criterion; in the goal-setting theory of Locke and Latham, it is recommended to choose goals within the 90th percentile of difficulty, based on the average prior performance of those that have performed the task.[7][3]
×