ks and bills) has a targeted income for a year of $200,000. After the first six months of the year, the lawyer has brought in $75,000. Assuming that there is no big settlement waiting in the wings, the lawyer is not on track at this point to meet her targeted income. She thus has three choices. She may simply abandon her targeted income or she may lower the targeted figure: Both of these responses are common and they may also in come cases be correct; however, if the original targeted figure was a reasonable one, these responses are likely not to be the most appropriate ones. Rather, what the lawyer should probably do is to change the way that she works so that she can meet the original target income. This might entail working more hours, billing more hours, or taking on different kinds of cases.
When used rationally and sensibly, target income provides businesses and individuals to create plans for the future that are based on an ideal combination of the facts that obtain in any given situation as well as the ambitions and goals that an individual or has. For example, in our hypothetical case above: One lawyer might decide that it is practical for her to make $200,000 a year and also that she wants to make that much money. However, another lawyer might well decide that while it is practical for her to make $200,000 a year, she would rather spend more time with her children and less time in the office
...