Process vs. goal orientation

[View page without inline references]

A buzzword today (especially in the school [see school] system) appears to be `process orientation', ie. that you focus on the process itself (ie. how a group works, communication [see communication], etc.), not just on the goal (the finished product). Now, in theory, this sounds good, but does it happen in practice? I don't think so, and that's what makes it so useless. (Now, of course, since I go to school and don't work [see Work] yet, I can only talk about the situation how it appears to me [see me].)

Now, the goal will possibly always say something about the process, but exactly what isn't always good to say. The whole idea of `fixing' the process is making the goal better -- if not now, perhaps the next time, or the time after that. (Actually, what one does is to introduce sub-goals as steps on the way to the final goal, which really makes sense; it's not a matter of replacing the existing goals or adding new ones, it's a matter of trying to augment the final set of goals with a limited set of goals the final product more or less depends on. Phew. :-) ) Now, say you've got to work with a group consisting mainly of not-so-intelligent people, and yourself. (Yes, this does happen, both at school, and in work life.) What would you do? The correct `process' would probably be including the other members of the group, giving them tasks, let them have their say, and finally hand in something [see writing] based equally on everybody's work.

Does this really happen? If it happened, would you get credit for it?

My guess is -- no. What would probably happen, is that you would do quite a lot more than the others, the product would be quite OK after all, and then the other members of the group would get equal credit to you. Why? Simply because the goal is what is regarded as important in 95% of the cases. This way of judging the work itself is wrong for a big reason: The goal gets to decide if the parts of the process were right or not. Thus, the whole meaning of the `process orientation' goes away -- it all becomes a competition of faking the best process, using the goal as false evidence.

Thus, my conclusion is that one should either just say that the finished product is the only goal (which, in my opinion, is horribly wrong for anything involving a group), or one should really check the process more closely -- not just base it on handed-in logs etc., which really do not work all that well in practice.