This is the time of year when individuals and organizations naturally undertake some introspection. This introspection usually produces some new priorities or directions for the coming new year. Unfortunately, many of these good intentions will fizzle out or soon prove to be too daunting or difficult to accomplish—so we will give up on them.

There is something about facing a new year that tends to “rev our engine” and make us want to “go big!” Whether it's a resolution to lose 30 pounds or double attendance in Sunday School, worthy goals can look more exciting—and more attainable—in late December than they do in mid-February. And when they fizzle out or we give up on them, then we have to deal with a sense of guilt or failure. Is there a solution to this vicious cycle?

At the risk of seeming to be a spoilsport about resolutions and goals, what if we were to fight our tendency to “go big” and opt for “going small” instead? Instead of setting a goal for losing 30 pounds, what if we start with losing five? And instead of a goal of doubling Sunday School attendance in 2012, what if we shot for getting six new families involved?

Starting small may not initially feel as exhilarating as “going big,” but in my experience, it has a much better chance of success. And if we can meet our more modest goal, it just might inspire us to try another one—maybe even before the new year runs out. Success tends to breed success and achieving a small victory might be just what we need to encourage us to keep motivated throughout the New Year.

Chris Gambill, December 2011