Opportunism

A possible example that has not yet fully come to fruition is the Segway. After extraordinary hype, almost two decades of work and $100M in development [1], it is mildly successful (~35,000 in use?). I think it's fairly easy to argue that the market niche didn't exist at the time of it's conception, and that it hasn't been the block buster it was expected to be.

Maybe in a couple more years it will be an example of a big goal achieved by monumental effort that you're looking for.

[1] - http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,186660-1,00.html

"Set big goals. Do whatever it takes to reach them." That has an disagreeably fascist ring.

I generally agree with him. Until one can see something is possible, it won't attract much attention. The problem is knowing the costs up front, and commonly underestimating them. The moon landing cost 3x projections. The bomb wasn't even capable of projection but had to be pursued at any cost. The unknowns are too great. One tries to minimize and reduce them as much as possible but they remain. Where setting goals first works is where there is no uncertainty about how to achieve them. First in autos? Just undersell everyone else. Largest market share in China? Open offices, hire people, produce and distribute product.

Quantum Computers

A problem with the Duggan prescription is that it is easier to see the large payoffs and low costs after successfully achieving those big goals, not before.

Going in, low costs are especially hard to guess right.

The X prize and sequencing the human genome come to mind - both from private sources.

Doing whatever it takes to reach your goals limits your ability to see the opportunities around you. Much better to have a few, short-term goals that can be dropped if a really big opportunity comes along.

And I'm not just talking about marriage; it works in business too :)

I have no doubt that if the President and NASA said we will put a man on Pluto by 2040, they would be able to accomplish it.

For the private sector, it depends on what your idea of big is. The only ones I can think of off the top of my head are Walt Disney and Fred Smith.

Google? "Indexing all the world's information" sounds like a pretty big goal to me.

Federal Express (the package-delivery business). Founder Frederick Smith had to raise a lot of capital and build a big machine before he could even launch the business, because he realized that to succeed it would have to serve a bunch of cities from the very first day.

Of course, big ideas can fail. Federal Express' Zapmail was a case in point.

Anything from the private sector?

How about Java technology? It was initially intended to replace the Windows desktop monopoly through a very thin, network approach. You didn't need Windows, Word and Excel; all you needed was a browser to access Java based applications which resided on the network and would load onto your PC for use.

The result: Java applications are non-existent; other technologies are passing it by in terms of providing rich desktop functionality through a web-based application; and it's the most common server-side programming language in the world.

The net of it is: it’s a highly successful piece of technology, just in a way that differed significantly from its original intent.

In "The No Asshole Rule", Sutton recommends looking for small victories and accomplishments, not only on general principle but in order to stay below the radar of assholes who tend to co opt or sabotage "big ideas".