“I want to stop feeling so behind.”
“I want to stop overthinking social interactions.”
“I want to stop having the same arguments with my partner.”
These sound like goals. But none of them actually express what you want. They only describe what you want to stop.
That matters because the direction of our lives is shaped by the goals we pursue. If those goals are defined only by what we want to escape, we can spend years solving problems and still be no closer to the life we actually want.
The Problem–Remedy–Outcome (PRO) model offers a useful framework to separate what we want to stop from what we actually want to create (Tompkins & Lawley, 2006):
- Problem: Something exists that you do not want. “I feel overwhelmed.”
- Remedy: You want the problem gone. “I want to stop feeling overwhelmed.”
- Outcome: You describe what you actually want to exist instead. “I want to feel calm and able to choose what I focus on.”
Problem and Remedy are organised around the problem, whereas Outcome builds toward the desired state. Take insecurity for example:
- “I feel insecure.” → Problem
- “I want to be less insecure.” → Remedy
- “I want more confidence.” → a starting Outcome
- “I want to be able to walk into a room, approach people I’m interested in, and speak freely even if I’m nervous.” → a much richer Outcome
This changes how we think about change
You might want to spend less time on your phone, which sounds like a goal. But it only says what should disappear, not what should take its place.
Without something compelling to take its place, removing the behaviour leaves a vacuum—and old habits have an easy way back in.
By shifting to the ideal outcome—“I want evenings filled with things absorbing enough that I forget to check my phone”—you now have something concrete to build toward.
So, whenever you notice yourself saying:
- “I need to stop…”
- “I need to be less…”
- “I want to get rid of…”
ask one additional question:
“And if that were no longer the problem, what would I want to be happening instead?”
Keep going until the answer describes something you could actually move toward.
Helping someone find their own outcome
PRO emerged from the Clean Language method of questioning, which explores someone’s experience while minimising the assumptions and interpretations introduced by the person asking the questions.
As a result, instead of shaping someone’s answer, Clean Language helps them articulate their own (Tompkins & Lawley, 2006). For example:
Person: “I’m exhausted.” (Problem)
Facilitator: “And when you’re exhausted, what would you like to have happen?”
Person: “I need to stop working so much.” (Remedy)
Facilitator: “And when you stop working so much, what would you like to happen?”
Person: “I want enough energy after work to enjoy time with my family.” (Outcome)
This shifts the attention while preserving the personal growth that comes from constructing one’s own outcome.
Clear outcomes create more options
Compare “I want to stop feeling anxious” with “I want to be able to speak freely in meetings even when some anxiety is present.”
The second opens up far more possibilities. And crucially, the outcome does not require the problem to disappear first.
Instead of designing your life entirely in reaction to what is wrong with it, you can ask a more expansive question:
Not “What needs to disappear?” but “What needs to exist?”
A good life is more than the absence of bad things
Across several areas of psychology, reducing the negative is not the same as cultivating the positive:
- No anxiety ≠ courage.
- No conflict ≠ intimacy.
- No failure ≠ mastery.
This idea was central to the emergence of positive psychology. Martin Seligman and Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi argued that psychology should concern itself not only with pathology and weakness but also with strengths and positive functioning (Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000):
“Treatment is not just fixing what is broken; it is nurturing what is best.”
A similar distinction is made between “approach goals” and “avoidance goals”:
- Approach goals: moving toward a desired state.
- Avoidance goals: preventing or escaping an undesired state.
Longitudinal research has found that avoidance goals can predict greater stress, more reliance on avoidant coping, and poorer subjective well-being (Elliot et al., 2011).
This does not mean avoidance is always wrong. Sometimes preventing or escaping an undesired state is precisely the right focus (e.g., in an abusive relationship). The aim is not to ignore the problem or the remedy but to move beyond them toward a clearly defined outcome.
So, whenever you find yourself wanting less of something, ask:
“What do I want more of instead?”
Not: “I want less stress.”
But: “I want more time, control, and freedom in my week.”
Not: “I want to stop being insecure.”
But: “I want to become someone who can express what I think without constantly checking how it will be received.”
Not: “I want to stop feeling lonely.”
But: “I want to foster relationships in which I feel understood, valued, and connected.”
Then, we can build a life that reflects what we actually value—not merely what we’re trying to avoid.
