You Can’t Crowdsource Audacity: The Pitfalls of Drafting a BHAG

Imagine a leadership team sitting around a boardroom table, flip charts lining the walls, markers uncapped, and energy buzzing. The goal? Draft a Big Hairy Audacious Goal (BHAG). They want a north star – something that will capture hearts and minds, something people can really visualize that will guide the company for the next 10–30 years.

But as the conversation unfolds, excitement turns into compromise. Some participants’ favourite parts of the business get sidelined. The statement becomes more inclusive. Vaguer. The words that emerge aren’t exactly bold. They’re comfortable, steady, achievable. They don’t require the organization to say “no” to anything (at least nothing they haven’t already excluded in the past). The final product becomes: “Keep doing what we’re doing, just a little bigger.”

Congratulations—you’ve just discovered two of the bigger pitfalls in drafting a BHAG: you can’t crowdsource audacity, and audacity requires an organization to say no.

What a BHAG Really Is

Jim Collins coined the term BHAG in Built to Last. His definition was a goal so big, hairy, and audacious that it fundamentally stretched the organization. It was supposed to feel almost laughable at first.

• Microsoft’s 1970s vision: “A computer on every desk and in every home.”
• JFK’s 1961 declaration: “This nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to the Earth.”
• Nike’s early rallying cry: “Crush Adidas.”
• SpaceX: “Enable human life on Mars.”

These weren’t polite consensus statements. They were bold, memorable, and polarizing. People either said, “You’re nuts” or “Sign me up.”

That tension is exactly the point.

Pitfall #1: Crowdsourcing Waters Down Audacity

When leaders bring the whole team into the BHAG-setting process, the intention is good. They want buy-in. They want alignment. They want everyone to feel part of the process.

But audacity doesn’t do well by committee. Here’s what tends to happen:

• The edges get sanded off. Each participant lobbies to keep their pet project or department in the mix. No one wants their piece of the business minimized. The result is a “both/and” statement rather than a “this, not that” decision.
• It drifts into safe territory. To get agreement, they shift towards what everyone already believes in: growth, stability, quality, reputation. All admirable, but not audacious.
• Consensus replaces clarity. They end up with something vague enough for everyone to support but not specific enough for anyone to truly rally behind.

The outcome? A direction that doesn’t scare or inspire anyone.

If everyone nods along in agreement, it’s probably not a BHAG.

Pitfall #2: Audacity Requires Saying “No”

A real BHAG means trade-offs. It forces an organization to prioritize some things and stop doing others.

Take Microsoft again. “A computer on every desk and in every home” meant they weren’t going to be in the business of mainframes. NASA’s moonshot meant diverting massive funds away from other scientific pursuits. Nike’s “Crush Adidas” meant channelling their marketing and innovation firepower squarely at an enemy.

If your so-called BHAG doesn’t require sacrifice, it’s not audacious – it’s incremental.

This is often where the resistance surfaces. Leaders want to believe they can be everything to everyone: safe and bold, diversified and focused, comfortable and inspiring. But audacity is about choice.

Why “Steady Eddie” Isn’t Enough

In a facilitation recently, a colleague and I found ourselves laughing with a client because their draft BHAG, when boiled down, was essentially: “Stay boring.” Reliable, steady, predictable growth. A fine strategy, to be sure but hardly audacious.

The truth is, “Steady Eddie” works until he doesn’t.

Like exercise and health, defining a BHAG is a Quadrant 2 activity: important but not urgent. Until, of course, it suddenly is. In health, urgency shows up the day after the heart attack. In business, it’s when technology shifts, customer needs evolve, or competitors start lapping you.

Without a bold, rallying destination, even well-run businesses risk becoming irrelevant.

10-Year Target vs. BHAG: Why They Get Confused

A lot of small to mid-sized companies run on EOS. It’s a fantastic system, but it does create confusion between the 10-Year Target and a BHAG.

• 10-Year Target: A measurable milestone, usually a financial outcome.
• BHAG: An audacious idea, usually qualitative and emotionally charged.

The 10-Year Target answers “how much?” The BHAG answers “why bother?”

Too often, companies mistake the number for the narrative. A goal like “reach $100M by 2035” is ambitious, yes, but it doesn’t light a fire. It doesn’t tell a story. It doesn’t create a movement.

Audacity requires meaning, not just math.

Why Leaders Resist True Audacity

Let’s be honest: bold visions are scary. When we help leaders wrestle with this, a few fears tend to come up:

1. Fear of alienating staff. What if long-tenured employees don’t like the new direction?
2. Fear of customer backlash. What if we lose loyal clients?
3. Fear of failure. What if we set the bar too high and look foolish?
4. Fear of change. What if we have to let go of things that have worked in the past?

These fears are natural. They’re also the reason many organizations never go beyond “safe and steady.”

But here’s the paradox: the very discomfort that makes a BHAG scary is what makes it powerful. If it doesn’t cause pushback, it’s not worth the ink on the flip chart.

Pitfall #3: Mistaking Staff Happiness for Company Effectiveness

Another subtle trap? Confusing what’s best for the company with what feels best for the team.

In one client discussion, it became clear the CEO wanted a BHAG everyone would like. He was prioritizing team happiness over organizational boldness. The issue: those two aren’t the same.

A leader’s job isn’t to make everyone comfortable. It’s to set a direction that makes the company thrive. Ironically, thriving companies usually do make employees happier in the long run but the order matters.

You don’t keep the team happy, so the company succeeds.
You build a successful company, and the team is happy because of it.

Pitfall #4: Confusing Comfort With Inspiration

Let’s face it: “steady, safe, and reliable” is attractive. It reassures staff, pleases customers, and sounds reasonable. But as a BHAG? It’s dead on arrival.

If your goal sounds like something you’d tell a bank manager to secure a loan, it’s not audacious.

A BHAG should make some people snort with laughter and others sit up straighter in their chairs. It should sound a little delusional, a little risky, and a lot exciting.

How to Draft a Real BHAG

So, if you can’t crowdsource audacity, how do you do it? Here are five practices that help:

1. Start With the Leader’s Gut

Audacity usually begins in one person’s imagination. Leaders should start by articulating the wild idea that won’t leave them alone.

Ask yourself:

• What would make competitors scoff?
• What would make employees gulp nervously?
• What would fundamentally change our place in the world?

2. Test It, Don’t Co-Create It

The leadership team’s role isn’t to invent the BHAG – it’s to react to it. Pressure-test it. Stress it. Point out blind spots. But don’t expect consensus from the start.

3. Separate BHAG From the Plan

• BHAG: The audacious destination.
• 10-Year Target: The measurable milestone.
• Annual Plan: The concrete actions.

When you blend them, you lose the spark.

4. Expect and Embrace Resistance

If your BHAG doesn’t cause discomfort, it’s not bold enough. Use resistance as a barometer – you’re on the right track when people mutter “that’s impossible.”

5. Tie It to Meaning, Not Just Money

Revenue growth isn’t inspiring on its own. What will your BHAG do for customers, for your industry, for society? Anchor it in purpose.

When Not to Have a BHAG

Here’s an important nuance: not every company needs to have a BHAG. Some leaders don’t want to be audacious, and that’s OK. Running a steady, reliable business that serves customers well and provides good jobs is honourable.

The danger comes when leaders pretend they’re being audacious but aren’t. If you want to be steady, own it. If you want to be bold, step into it. The trouble lies in muddling the two.

Why This Matters

Drafting a BHAG is one of the most challenging strategy exercises a company can do. It asks for courage, vision, and trade-offs. Done well, it can galvanize a company for decades. Done poorly, it turns into a watered-down platitude taped to the wall.

So, before your next offsite, ask yourself:

• Are we prepared to make people uncomfortable?
• Are we willing to say “no” to good ideas in order to chase a great one?
• Are we brave enough to stick our necks out and declare something audacious?

Because you can’t crowdsource audacity. And audacity, by definition, requires saying no.