What are OKRs?

And how to write them

OKRs (Objectives and Key Results) are a two-level What/How scheme for expressing the purposes of a team over an extended period of time, usually a quarter. The Objectives are the ‘what’ and the Key Results are the ‘how’.

OKRs are a modern version of a venerable team guidance system called MBO (Management by Objective), invented and popularized by management guru Peter Drucker in the 60s, and resurrected most influentially by Google.

The point of OKRs is to provide an easy way for the business to:

• organize multiple teams’ (usually 3–6 teams per division) objectives in a way likely to roll up coherently to the company’s divisional or overall strategy (because that is otherwise like herding cats)
• delegate responsibilities so that senior managers can avoid having to babysit individual day-to-day tasks while still being able to sleep at night (because that makes managers and their teams scalable)
• frame success in objective, measurable criteria that is hard to fake, misunderstand, or argue about (because that ensures good team-oriented positive or negative feedback about performance)
• give the staff the trust and freedom to own the delivery of a substantive level of what the business wants, without management having to worry too much about the low-level details (because staff perform best with ownership, responsibility, and authority over their work)

OKRs, after a joint period of feedback and revision among stakeholders, are a promise from a team to its manager to deliver certain results in a certain timeframe.

The unwritten contract is that the manager will be informed of any facts that may threaten success, as soon as the team becomes aware of them (with reasonable confidence). In return, the manager will leave the team alone to do their job, support their efforts where needed, with the expectation of weekly updates on any notable progress or blockage towards milestones, and be open to revising the plan in the face of the most recent reliable facts.

Well-defined OKRs satisfy the following criteria that ensure they roll up:

1. The Objectives will seem like “Whats” to accomplish for the team manager, but “Hows” to their manager’s strategy (e.g., to a VP), and “Whys” to the staff working on project tasks.
2. Key Results will feel like “Whats” to the team staff, and “Hows” relative to the team’s manager, and “Whys” relative to the individual day-to-day tasks that they generate.
3. The definition of “accomplished” for both Objectives and Key Results are their criteria for success, which are simple and measurable. If the criteria are observably met, the KR and/or O is accomplished (i.e. sufficient conditions).

It’s worth noting that many organizations (usually startups or older companies still ruled by a founder dictator) have cultures that are not yet developed enough to successfully implement OKRs. OKRs depend on the organization’s ability to frame objectives and plans sufficiently clearly, reliably, and stably that the plans can stay relevant over a few months (vs daily or weekly course-changes from founders or managers), and on the ability of managers to properly delegate goals to teams (vs micromanaging). That said, these organizations can use the OKR framework as scaffolding to help develop that maturity. Some organizations are just too small to make much use of OKRs — needing at least two levels of management (typically required by organizations with at least 3–6 teams / over 50 staff).

Dig deeper in A Theory of Planning.