Few analytic goals have been proposed for hematology tests, and these are based upon subjective clinical opinions. It is proposed that the current consensus strategies for delineating analytic goals in clinical chemistry can be validly used in the other disciplines of clinical pathology. Goals for imprecision are best based upon average intraindividual biologic variation; such goals are more stringent than those previously published. There are many cogent reasons that justify the goal for inaccuracy of no bias. In consequence, goals for imprecision should be viewed as goals for total laboratory error. Further experimental work on biologic variation is required to develop a wider range of goals for hematology and coagulation tests, if these strategies are considered worthy of adoption.