Most people fail to achieve their physical activity goals. Here’s what to do instead.

Now, a major new study led by Professor Swann, involving researchers across Australia, UK, Canada, and America, suggests the problem may be far more widespread than previously understood.

The systematic review and meta-analysis examined 89 randomised controlled trials involving 10,219 people, and its primary analysis (focusing on the strongest studies) found the majority failed to achieve their physical activity goals at every point measured, with failure rates ranging from 57.9 to 77 per cent. This means that only 23 to 42 per cent of people achieved their goals in these studies.

Goal achievement also declined over time: more people achieved their goals initially but rates of failure were higher towards the end of physical activity programs.

“For a long time, our field has relied on a one-size-fits-all approach to setting goals,” Professor Swann said.

“Essentially everyone gets a specific goal – like aiming for 10,000 steps per day or 150 minutes of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity per week.”

And that is where Professor Swann believes the new findings become particularly important.

More than 92 per cent of the higher-quality studies examined used specific performance or SMART (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, Timebound) goals – despite the majority of participants failing to achieve them.

When progress can still look like failure

Goal setting is one of the most commonly used strategies for increasing physical activity, appearing in exercise programs, fitness trackers, public health campaigns and clinical interventions.

That makes sense: goals can provide structure and motivation, and previous evidence shows goal setting can help people become more active.

But Professor Swann said the new research exposes an important tension between increasing activity and achieving a target.

Someone who usually walks 5,000 steps a day might set a goal of 10,000 and increase their activity to 8,000.

They have made substantial progress – but against the goal itself, they may feel like they have failed.

That distinction matters because repeatedly missing a target can have consequences beyond the number on a fitness tracker.

Research links goal failure with lower confidence and motivation, as well as negative emotions including frustration, anger, sadness, shame and guilt. Those responses can ultimately contribute to people disengaging from the behaviour altogether and giving up.

Professor Swann said the concern was particularly relevant for people who were insufficiently active.

“It’s possible that, inadvertently, our field has been relying on an approach that is essentially creating psychological barriers to staying active, for many of the people who we're trying to help the most,” he said.

“These findings are even more relevant given the ongoing conversation about the importance of building exercise habits alongside GLP-1 medications to support healthy weight loss.”

What if people had more choice?

Importantly, the findings do not mean people should stop setting exercise goals.

Instead, Professor Swann argues it is time to move away from assuming that a one-size-fits-all approach will work for everyone.

One finding from the study’s primary analysis was that participants were more likely to achieve goals developed collaboratively than goals prescribed to them – so it’s important to provide people with a choice.

Professor Swann leads the Open Goals Lab at Southern Cross University where their team is exploring what those additional options might look like.

One promising alternative is to use open goals.

Instead of aiming to walk 10,000 steps, someone might simply aim to “see how many steps I can reach today.”

Or, instead of aiming to reach 150 minutes of physical activity this week, someone could aim to “see how active I can be this week.”

Open goals are deliberately non-specific, they’re exploratory, and you can challenge yourself to do more – without defining success or failure against a fixed number.

Professor Swann said this flexibility can be particularly useful when people are in the early stages of learning how to do complex tasks (like learning how to increase your physical activity and stick with it), and when circumstances change.

His team’s research suggests open goals can provide greater flexibility and autonomy, and can provide a more positive way for people to experience physical activity.

Open goals also reduce the likelihood of experiencing negative emotions such as guilt or pressure. As one participant put it, “open goals take away the trauma of failing.”

But Professor Swann stresses they are not intended to become another universal prescription.

“Our core message at the moment is to at least provide people with some choice,” he said.

Some people may thrive on a specific target. Others may benefit from an open goal, while some individuals might move between different types of goals depending on their circumstances.

Professor Swann said the question is not simply whether a goal is specific or open, but whether it suits the person and the task.

For someone who is insufficiently active, becoming more active can itself be a complex task. Setting a highly specific performance target from the outset may not always be the best fit while they are still learning what they can do and how physical activity fits into their life.

An open goal – such as “see how active you can be today” – gives someone room to explore what they can achieve without immediately defining success or failure against a fixed number.

The new review similarly concludes that physical activity programs should broaden the goal-setting approaches available to participants, including open goals, while also helping people cope with and learn from occasions when they do fall short.

Rethinking what success looks like

The findings are already shaping real-world practice.

A new national referral model by AUSactive, Australia’s peak body for the exercise, fitness, and active health sector, proposes linking healthcare settings to community-based, professionally delivered exercise and active health programs.

It cites the Southern Cross University research, identifying open goals among the behaviour-change approaches practitioners could use to help people become and stay more active.

AUSactive’s aim is to help people get moving and give them the greatest chance of success in improving both their physical and mental health. Referring people to programs that include the option of open goals is an effective way to build confidence, create positive experiences with movement and establish sustainable habits that can last a lifetime.

"We’re working to get more Australians moving, but good intent is not good enough.  Sustainable lifestyle change needs a strong foundation. Campaigns like our Million Moves program provide the option to sign up to open goals,” said Ken Griffin, CEO of AUSactive. 

With almost one-third of adults globally not meeting recommended levels of physical activity, the stakes extend well beyond whether someone closes the rings on their smartwatch.

Professor Swann said helping more people become active may therefore require a change in how success is defined.

The new research suggests simply setting a target and asking people to reach it may not be working for the majority of participants studied.

Instead, the researchers argue that physical activity programs should pay greater attention to how goals are chosen, how people respond when they fall short, and whether success can be framed in ways that encourage continued participation rather than disengagement.

For someone who walked 8,000 steps instead of their target of 10,000, that could mean recognising progress rather than registering failure.

And sometimes, Professor Swann argues, it could mean starting with a different type of goal altogether:

See how active you can be.