Holding one clearly defined overriding goal is claimed to be the decisive factor in achievement.
Hill's Think and Grow Rich built the doctrine from interviews with successful men, which is a design that cannot distinguish a cause of success from a feature of people who succeeded. What survives with evidence is the goal-setting finding that specific difficult goals outperform vague intention, which is narrower and better supported than the claim made here.
In practice
- A person with one stated objective allocates time differently from one with nine, which is measurable and is not the claim.
- A biography that finds singular purpose in every successful subject has sampled only the successful.
- Possible explanations
- The explanation offered is that a single overriding goal directs attention and effort, and filters opportunities. Goal-setting research supports a narrower version in which specific, difficult goals raise performance when the person is committed.
- In its favour
- Specific goals do outperform vague encouragement in controlled studies, so the directional advice matches a real finding.
- Against it
- The book's evidence is interviews with successful men, which cannot distinguish a cause of success from a feature of those who succeeded, and the author's account of his sources has been questioned.
- Standing
- From a self-help tradition whose evidence is testimonial and selected on success, and whose author's reporting of his sources has been questioned. Goal-setting research supports a much narrower version.
- Subject
- Creativity & Work
- Essay
- The success literature and its sceptics