Specify the Target, Then Rehearse the Line
I cannot hit a target you won't specify — so name the wanted outcome and practise saying it badly
- Difficulty
- Easy
- Time to result
- ~weeks to results
- Steps
- 5
- Confidence
- 92%
Peterson's rule for turning a complaint into something actionable: a grievance without a specified desired outcome cannot be satisfied, because there is no target. When someone is unhappy with you, the correct question is what they actually want, and if the answer is 'I don't know', that is not acceptable — a target has to be discussed. He extends it into a rehearsal protocol: ask your partner what you should have said, then actually say it, badly and artificially at first, with an eye to mastering it over fifty repetitions. The same rule generalises to work, where bringing a solution alongside a problem builds a reputation that moves you up a hierarchy fast.
Origin
Offered as a rule for couple conflict, then immediately generalised by Peterson to employees taking problems to their bosses.
Core principles
- 01You cannot hit a target that has not been specified.
- 02'I don't know what I want' is a starting point for discussion, not an acceptable end state.
- 03A first attempt at a new response will be fake, clumsy, and badly executed — that is expected.
- 04Mastery of a new interaction pattern takes on the order of fifty repetitions.
- 05Bringing a solution with the problem is what accelerates you up a hierarchy.
How to run it
- 1
Surface the unhappiness
State plainly that you are unhappy with the other person, or receive that statement from them, without deflecting it.
- 2
Demand a specified target
Ask what they want — if you could give them what they wanted, what would it be — and refuse to accept 'I don't know' as the final answer.
Pro tip Peterson's exact framing: 'I cannot hit a target you won't specify. Let's discuss it at least.'
Watch out Without a target the complaint becomes a permanent grievance with no possible resolution.
- 3
Ask what you should have said
For a specific incident, ask what the ideal response would have been in that moment. Peterson notes this is a hard question for the other person too.
Pro tip Make it concrete and situational rather than abstract — a line, not a principle.
- 4
Say the line out loud
Actually deliver the sentence they gave you, acknowledging openly that it is a first-pass approximation and their words in your mouth.
Pro tip Frame it as trying to do something better stupidly and badly to begin with, aiming at mastery over fifty repetitions.
Watch out If you are genuinely unwilling to say it because it violates your conscience, that is a signal of a deeper discussion, not a failure of the exercise.
- 5
Keep the rubric
Check whether the delivered line actually satisfied them, and retain it as a template for how that interaction goes in future.
Pro tip Protect early attempts — punishing a new behaviour on its first outing kills it.
In the wild
You say something that irritates your partner. Rather than debating whether she is too sensitive or you are a son of a bitch, you ask what you should have said instead, she supplies a version, and you say it.
→ You end up with a concrete rubric for how that interaction should run in future, rather than an unresolved verdict about character.
Instead of taking only a problem to your boss, you take the problem together with a proposed solution.
→ In a halfway decent business you get a reputation as the person who solves problems and ratchet up the hierarchy remarkably fast.
Common mistakes
Complaining without naming what you want
An unspecified want cannot be delivered, so the complaint recurs indefinitely and both parties conclude the other is unreasonable.
Refusing to rehearse because it feels fake
The first attempts at a new response are supposed to be artificial and poorly executed; treating that awkwardness as proof of insincerity aborts the learning.
Punishing the first attempt
A newly agreed tactic is fragile, like something just out of a cocoon. Criticising the first clumsy delivery kills the behaviour outright.
Is it for you?
Best for
Couples cycling on the same unresolved complaint, and employees who currently escalate problems without proposals.
Not ideal for
Conflicts where the request itself is unreasonable or violates the other person's conscience — those need a different conversation.
From the transcript
“I cannot hit a target you won't specify.”
“if you're the sort of employee who goes to your boss with a solution, you'll rocket yourself up the hierarchy”
“if I had said what you wanted me to say in that situation, what would have I said?”
“with an eye to mastering it over 50 repetitions”
From the episode
Doctor Jordan Peterson: "The NUMBER ONE Reason For Divorce!" & "The One Small Step You Have To Take To Turn Your Whole Life Around!"
Jordan Peterson