Are Scotland smart to spell out grand ambitions?
I am going to give you my target for Scottish rugby at the end of this and I want you to answer the question: what should a target for the game in your country be?
I got a press release through from the SRU. I read it at my desk. Colleagues gathered round. Am I wrong to have a slightly jaded feeling about a strategic plan that says the chief executive Mark Dodson "will unveil ambitious targets of securing a Six Nations Grand Slam by 2016 and winning the World Cup"?
My guess is that the banks had rather silly economic outlook forecasts, all coming from impressively-suited and highly paid individuals, just before the financial crash too and I believe that forecasting anything in this world is a very dangerous business.
Surely forecasts have to be SMART? That means Simple, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant and Time-bound.
If I am honest, I have a problem with the Attainable bit. And the Relevant bit.
Scotland finished bottom of the 2012 Six Nations table after five defeats
It all got me scrabbling around. This isn't the first-ever strategic plan. Oh no. The previous SRU strategic plan was written in 2007 for the period from then until now.
Among the targets were to: "Achieve a top-eight world ranking by 2012". Did that happen? No, we slipped to 12th after this year's Six Nations and currently sit ninth after three wins on tour.
I acknowledge that, given 2012 hasn't finished, this one might happen.
Then there was a target to: "As a minimum, reach the quarter-finals of the 2007 and 2011 World Cups." Er, no, we didn't make the last eight in New Zealand. That one was definitely wrong.
Or what about, from the same SRU strategic plan for 2007 to 2012, to: "Improve the win rate in the Six Nations from 25% to 40%". No again. In fact, under Andy Robinson, the win rate is actually 13% at two wins from 15 games, so instead of doubling it, we've halved it. That one was way out.
And one of the other targets was "win the Six Nations at least once by 2012". Nope again.
And it was all topped by the hope that Scotland would "become one of the top rugby nations in the world".
It's not just a Scottish disease this.
The Irish, in their 2008 strategic plan, had as a target "to reach the 2011 World Cup semi-finals". They lost to Wales in the quarter-finals.
The English rugby strategic plan 2008 to 2015 has as one of its targets "to win the World Cup in 2011 and 2015 - and to win the Six Nations four times, including two Grand Slams".
I put it to you, m'Lud, that they have already failed to make their rather ambitious targets. England were beaten by France in the quarter-final in 2011 - and to think they were supposed to win that tournament. Maybe nobody had told the opposition!
The problem is that, as you sit in your room and write down your sporting targets and try to imagine your route to world domination, every other country in the world is trying to get better as well.
You cannot predict how your crop of top players will perform in the future, nor the ability of that particular crop of players. And, if you don't believe me, put yourselves in the place of the All Blacks, who messed up spectacularly in every World Cup between 1987 and 2011.
What do I think? Well, I don't think you can write down targets for elite rugby. Generally, the bigger countries with the bigger systems behind them will be more successful than the smaller ones.
Elite sport is driven by its grass roots. To spell out that you have a target of winning a certain number of Grand Slams or winning a World Cup is mere fantasy. It's grand-standing.
Here's my simple target for Scottish rugby - and it would have a bigger impact on our future than any other: Get every school in Scotland to field rugby teams - backed by the private sector if need be - and get a league up and running.
There, that's mine, nothing about Grand Slams or World Cups. Instead, grow the grass roots and make it competitive.
Yours? Or have I got this all wrong?
Follow John Beattie on Twitter at @BBCJohnBeattie