David Salas Oct 11, 2010:

very well put but I'm not sure they're referring to "objectives as they are" or to "objectives as everyone does them". One would imply change, whereas the other would not necessarily.

kashew Oct 11, 2010:

Yes: so why not throw out the Latin completely and use simple basic language: if we don't change things we won't get better results. Isn't that the essence, David?

David Salas Oct 11, 2010:

@kashew quite possibly, but imho its not an "average=average" here, but it's the "average/acceptable=average/not acceptable" concept that I thinks gets lost in a straight forward translation, no?

kashew Oct 11, 2010:

Surely no-change policy = no-change results is the proposition? Be it sound or unsound reasoning, I don't see why one should translate to other than status quo each time.

David Salas Oct 11, 2010:

I agree. how about... ... something using "moyen/médiocre"? like "des objectifs statu quo n'obtiennent que des resultats moyens/médiocres.

Or you could say something like this: "un objectif normal n'obtiendra pas de résultat hors normes."

Anne Carnot (asker) Oct 11, 2010:

yes, that's the main difficulty...as I understand it, a status quo objective is sort of neutral, whereas a status quo result is more negative. I was thinking of something around the line of "des objectifs de maintien du niveau d'activité entraînent généralement des résultats stagnants", but it's a bit heavy to my taste...

David Salas Oct 11, 2010:

Status quo versus status quo? Imo, the difficulty here is in finding a way to translate the two different ways in which "status quo" is being used (first time literally, second time with a negative connotation). Anne, am I right in assuming that we're not only looking for the way to translate the first time but the second too?