Ever wonder what's really happening in the OKR world beyond the hype?
Join Sara Lobkovich, Maria Rowcliffe, and Natalie Webb for a candid, no-BS look at where OKRs are heading in 2025. This isn't your typical "here's how to write an objective" conversation. Instead, you'll get insider insights from three veteran practitioners who've been in the trenches, helping organizations navigate the messy reality of goal-setting and alignment at scale.
In this first part of our quarterly update, we dive deep into the generative AI revolution (spoiler: it's not as revolutionary as everyone claims), the evolving art of OKR localization across complex organizations, and why your retrospectives might be the most important OKR practice you might be doing wrong. Whether you're an OKR skeptic, a seasoned practitioner, or somewhere in between, this conversation will give you practical insights you can't get anywhere else.
Episode Highlights:
- Generative AI in OKRs: why draft quality is improving, but real strategic impact is still lagging behind
- TRV (Technology Realized Value): the Big Five’s new metric for linking OKRs to actual tech investment outcomes
- The “Two Lists” Problem: how teams are secretly working off dual strategies—and why it’s undermining OKR focus
- Cascading and Localization: evolving models for aligning across global teams, even amid geopolitical complexity
- Culture-First OKRs: tailoring implementation to readiness, from transformation-driven overhauls to scrappy gradual rollouts
- Retrospectives that matter: how deeper reflection—not just review—builds quarter-over-quarter OKR maturity
Key Concepts Explored:
- Generative AI in OKRs: Where it's accelerating strategy work, where it's falling short, and the risk of generic, uncontextualized models
- Technology Realized Value (TRV): A new metric used alongside OKRs to measure the tangible impact of tech investments
- The “Two Lists” Problem: How parallel strategic workstreams outside the OKR framework dilute focus and undermine accountability
- Localization & Alignment: Why clear, bottom-up contribution is critical in global, matrixed organizations—especially in high-stakes geopolitical climates
- Culture-Responsive Implementation: Tailoring OKR rollouts based on organizational readiness, risk appetite, and transformation goals
- Iterative Learning over Perfection: Why OKR maturity builds quarter over quarter—and how learning from retrospectives is more valuable than writing the “perfect” OKR
- Leading vs. Lagging Indicators: The power of AI to help surface potential leading indicators clients may struggle to define on their own
- Transformation & Change Management: How OKRs, when paired with transformation strategy, become powerful drivers of organizational evolution
Notable Quotes:
"Is this really driving the value you wanted to achieve? How do you know who cares? So what happens if this is done or not done? These things that don't get asked are so critically important to make sure that people are focused on the right work." — Natalie Webb [00:12:00]
"If I could only tell clients one thing about OKRs, it would be we spend all of our time focused on writing them and then way too little time focused on learning from them." — Sara Lobkovich [00:23:00]
"I think the best way to use OKRs initially is always the way that the company is willing and able to adopt it. Me talking about the gold star way of doing OKRs isn't gonna help clients that are at the crawling level and not a hundred percent convinced yet." — Maria Rowcliffe [00:21:00]
"OKRs are really hard. We're talking about change - really hard for people to stick with when it gets challenging." — Sara Lobkovich [00:28:00]
Chapters:
[00:00:00] Introduction:...
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:01):
Welcome to the Thinkydoers podcast.
Thinkydoers are those of us drawnto deep work, where thinking is
working, but we don't stop there.
We're compelled to move the work frominsight to idea, through the messy
middle, to find courage and confidenceto put our thoughts into action.
I'm your host, Sara Lobkovich.
(00:23):
I'm a strategy coach, a huge goal-settingand attainment nerd, and board-certified
health and wellness coach working atthe overlap of work life well-being I'm.
Also a Thinkydoer.
I'm here to help others find moresatisfaction, less frustration, less
friction, and more flow in our work.
(00:46):
My mission is to help changemakers likeyou transform our workplaces and world.
So let's get started.
All right, all, welcome.
I have a special treat for you today.
I'm here today with my OKR besties,Maria Rowcliffe and Natalie
(01:07):
Webb, for our Q2 2025 OKR update.
This became a quarterly gatheringafter we did the last one in Q1
and had so much fun, we decidedto do this live every quarter.
In this first part of our conversation,we'll have a little update on how we're
seeing generative AI being used in OKRpractice, the evolution of localization
(01:30):
and methods of cascading of OKRs, and howdifferent approaches to retrospectives
can drive organizational learning.
It's a packed discussion withinsights from all three of
us, so let's get started.
Sara (01:45):
Welcome, everyone, to this Q2.
It's weird, I keep losing track ofwhat month and quarter it is, but Q2
2025 OKR update with my OKR besties,Maria Rowcliffe and Natalie Webb.
We did this last quarter andhad so much fun, we decided
we're gonna do it quarterly.
I also think this earned us thenickname of the OKR Dream Team.
(02:08):
It just makes me so happy.
There are so many amazing voices on OKRs,and one of the things I absolutely love
is how much we are all in this together.
So, I'm Sara Lobkovich.
I'm your host of Thinkydoers.
I am the owner and operator of RedCurrant Collective and the author of
the new book, you are a Strategist: Use No-BS OKRs to get Big Things Done. (02:26):
undefined
came out in march in ebook, and thenprint launch was earlier this week with
independent availability as of yesterday.
You can get your copy mostplaces where books are sold.
And that book exists partly because ofthe two ladies that I'm on screen with,
(02:48):
encouraging me, marching to the beatof my own drummer in the OKR space.
Maria (02:52):
How do you feel, Sara, being up/down with it?
You've been working on this, Iwouldn't call the labor of love,
because I know there's also been alot of pain involved in getting there.
So, how do you feel now?
Sara (03:02):
It's really humbling.
That's what I'd say.
Maria (03:04):
Congratulations.
Sara (03:05):
Thank you.
And you two are next.
So, Natalie, go for it.
Let's tell folks who you are.
Natalie (03:10):
Natalie Webb, founder of Cloud Peak Enterprise Group.
I do OKR consulting all around the world.
I've been in it likeeight years, I guess, now.
And really happy to be herewith these two brilliant ladies.
I am a big fan of your book.
In fact, I'm taking it with me, andseveral other copies to Barcelona next
week, because there is a gatheringof OKR experts with OKR Mentors.
(03:33):
And we'll give it out maybe as prizesfor the folks attending Barcelona.
So, I'm stoked about that.
Congratulations, friend.
It's a wonderful book.
Sara (03:41):
Thank you.
I'm OKR Mentors alumni, and I wish Ihad the time to stay participating.
It's an awesome group.
Natalie, and then Maria, tellfolks who you are and what you do.
Maria (03:52):
Maria Rowcliffe.
I've been doing strategy developmentwith more of an emphasis on
execution for 25 years or so.
The last six or sevenyears more focused on OKRs.
I have found it to be the most impactfulway of aligning an organization
around strategic priorities.
My focus is more on the executionpart, which I think has something
(04:15):
to do with the fact that for over 10years have primarily had chief of staff
and had a business operations role,when I've been responsible for either
implementing OKRs or transformingor revamping a program that, for one
reason or another, isn't going well.
Sara (04:30):
Yeah.
And there's so much focus on creatingstrategy and OKRs, and so relatively
little on how to achieve it.
But let's start with generative AI.
It's still what everyone'stalking about in OKRs.
Every tool has some kind ofgenerative AI story at this point.
I would love to hear from you both, hasanything changed since we gathered last
(04:54):
in how you're using generative AI or howyou're seeing clients use generative AI?
Maria (04:59):
Yeah, I'm not seeing a change yet.
I'm not seeing a big shift.
I'm still seeing a huge interest in it.
There's more talk about thepotential of it, but I am not
seeing any real improvement.
What I am seeing is that every singleOKR platform, or any platform that
has goal setting or goal executionin it, now has an AI component,
(05:21):
which includes looking at helping toidentify objectives, key results, and
figure out alignment and all that.
So there's the mechanics of that,but I'm not seeing organizations
that are not using platformsusing AI in either developing
their OKRs or executing on them.
Natalie (05:40):
Yeah.
I've seen a shift from Q1 to Q2around a new metric, called TRV.
I don't know if you guys have heard it.
And it's almost sort of a blendof KPIs and OKRs at the same time.
The definition, it'sTechnology Realized Value.
You can apply it to financial,operational, or experiential types
of technology, but it's really aroundthat technology investment, and are you
(06:03):
getting the return on the investment?
A lot of Big Five consulting firms areusing that too in collaboration with OKRs.
And what I'm seeing they're doing isputting in some of the summary details
about a project or a big program,multi-quarter, multi-year program,
and using generative AI to say whatare the themes that are coming up in
(06:25):
some of the interviewing feedback.
I have come to find, even just this year,these early one-on-one conversations
I have with executives in preparationfor an on-site meeting are so hugely
beneficial because themes start emergingand they want to see that executive
summary of those themes, which is,tell us what our people are saying.
(06:46):
One of the questions I always ask in myinterview questions in preparation for
on-site is, "What are your potentialmoonshot ideas? What would you do
if you had a magic wand, unlimitedpeople, time, money?" And those turn
into some really great hotbeds of OKRs.
So I'm seeing that using AI on a privateenvironment is really valuable because it
(07:08):
gives you the themes and the percentagesof information so that you can net
out to the client what you're seeing.
Sara (07:14):
Can I sit right in between?
I'm using it in a similar way.
I have private instances that are closedoff, where I anonymize customer data
and have trained models to processmeeting notes to look for insight or
ideas, yes, potential OKRs could be.
It's not a replacement for thecoaching, because I have experimented
(07:36):
with using my model to develop a draftobjective for clients, and they don't
remember it if they don't develop it.
It's not a replacement.
But I am finding it to be a bit ofan accelerator in getting people
from that endless discussion andbeing hesitant to get to a decision.
It's like, I can cut off the discussionand say, "Let me ask my model what
(07:57):
it thinks," and then come back andsay, "All right, here's a candidate,
discuss." So, that's how I'm using it.
I became aware of actually becauseof Ben Lamorte talking about it and
posting about it, OKR chat models beingreleased by people with absolutely no
sourcing of what they're trained on.
And so, I would say there's a cautionright now that I trust the platforms
(08:21):
that are implementing, subject towhatever their terms of use are, but OKR
platforms implementing with some kind ofgenerative AI, I kind of trust, because
at least they're in the OKR business.
And then generative AI workbeing done by other OKR
professionals that are identified.
Cool.
But man, clients are gonna get hurt.
(08:41):
Users are gonna get hurt by anonymousmodels that don't have sourcing.
And as a content creator, justkills me to see elements of my work.
It's like, you can see whereyou've been the training.
Natalie (08:56):
Yeah.
Sara (08:57):
And I just, can't wait till we can source back Who has
trained what on my materials.
Let's see.
Because that part ofit is just super shady.
Maria (09:08):
Yeah.
I am a little bit, in your camp in termsof how I use, because I use it myself.
And one thing that has improved sincelast quarter is that the instances of
myself that I have created, because Ihave to have quite a few doing different
things for me, so I am no longer a team ofone, I'm a team of actually six or seven
that I have that do different things.
(09:29):
But I would say that has become better.
Because in the first quarter, when Istarted more using it, I was fighting
it to go, it would give me back thingsthat, "No, this is not a KR... no,
this is absolutely not an objective."So I think that the quality of
what I get back has become better.
But I'm not seeing clientsdo that on their own.
(09:49):
So it might be that I amsharing some examples.
And again, I'm more focusingon the leading indicators.
because I think that is where AI canactually help the most, because those
are the ones that aren't as intuitiveas the regular lagging indicators.
I would say, though, that I've alsotried a lot of these OKR generators
that are on some company websites.
I'm not gonna name names.
(10:11):
And I would say that what they comeup with are not things that the three
of us would say, "That's a greatobjective," or "That's a great KR."
But that was even a problem, I think,for me when I was advising clients on
which platform to potentially go with.
Because I was just like, if youare looking at platforms, look
at the definition that they haveand the examples that they have
(10:32):
of objectives and key results.
Because if they have examples of KRin particular, which is my biggest pet
peeve, that are just milestones andactivities and the kind of stuff you
actually should be managing as partof program management, if that is the
examples they have, any training material,anything that they have on their website,
everything that they might generateas part of an AI generator for OKRs
(10:55):
or whatever, it's gonna include that.
And so it's gonna lead you downa path that are gonna make OKRs
a less impactful methodology foryour company to implement than not.
Sara (11:07):
Yeah, absolutely.
I'm also in that process of trainingavatar mes, because I figured if
other people are training modelson my work, then why can't I?
I think we're gonna continueto see a lot of attention here.
There's so much focus on OKRs, butI feel like it's constricting a bit.
It's one of the reasons I'm glad to haveanother OKR book out in the world right
(11:29):
now, because we need to drive awareness,and drive awareness that OKRs that people
saw in 2016 or 2017, what we're doingnow bears little resemblance to what was.
Being done in the earlieriterations of OKRs.
So, on the one hand, if all this focusand stuff enables people to try OKRs
(11:50):
and then figure out that it can be donebetter than what generic models are
providing in terms of support — cool.
I just really hope that we don'tsee people play with OKR generators
and think that that's what OKRs are.
Natalie (12:05):
I think I'm in that camp.
And you mentioned what Ben did.
I've seen some generated OKRs, andthe theory of it, the textbook of
it, I guess, meets the criteria.
But what is missing, even when I'vebeen in sessions and folks in the room
have used a generator to say, "Oh,this whatever AI tool says, this is a
perfectly worded key result," and I say,"Yes." But this is where I think that
(12:29):
the consulting comes in, is this reallydriving the value you wanted to achieve?
How do you know?
Who cares, right?
Then, so what?
So what happens if thisis done or not done?
And some of those things that don'tget asked, I think are so critically
important to make sure that peopleare focused on the right work.
It could be written very well, butit also could be missing the mark
(12:49):
completely on the value you're expecting.
to get from it.
Sara (12:52):
Yeah.
So to put a bow on the generativeAI conversation, the takeaway that
I'm gonna reinforce that came fromboth of you is, one of the places
models can be particularly helpfulis in solving the problems that
humans are having trouble solving.
Maria mentioned leading indicators, andthen Natalie, you mentioned getting to
what's really contributing to results.
(13:13):
That's a place I'm rightthere with you too.
When clients are having a hard timedeveloping leading indicators, I
usually can, but I don't wanna offer.
I'm a coach.
I don't offer the answer;I ask the questions.
But it has been interesting toplay with a trained model that is
(13:33):
skilled at identifying possibleleading indicators, because it helps
clients see what we're talking about.
It's like it gives them a relevant,local example, and then they're like,
"That's not it, but that lets me knowwhat we're aiming for." Because I
think that is one of the things that,generic examples, especially like
generic examples of objectives andkey results, are good teaching tools.
(13:55):
But generic examples of leadingindicators, people just don't get it.
So I think that's a good takeaway fromthis is, that's one of the uses that
all three of us are seeing value in.
Okay, so then our next topic islocalization or cascading and what
is changing or evolving in practicesaround localization and cascading.
(14:17):
And for folks who are less familiarwith objectives and key results,
that is the process of moving OKRsthrough an organization, where we
have company-level objectives andkey results that might localize to
functional orgs and localize to teams.
And I'm super curious to hear whatyou two are seeing in localization.
(14:40):
Let's start with Natalie for this one.
Natalie (14:42):
Yeah, it's really interesting because I'm working
right now with a couple companiesthat are globally matrixed.
And it's particularly interestingin this geopolitical climate
around tariffs, right?
We're seeing some new challengesthat have not bubbled up before.
So ever more important to have reallyclear, focused, and transparent
(15:03):
OKRs at the functional team levels,and that we're doing that check
between leadership and the functionalteams and there's not any misses.
And I'm finding there's more misseswhere I work with a functional team
and they say, "These are our moststrategic things that we have to get
done in the next 90 days," And thentheir leadership says, "Well, what
about these three other things?" Right?
(15:23):
And I'm like, Well, they didn't mentionthose, so let's make sure we don't have
any misses, and then we have to adjust."And so I'm seeing the localization
be even more important to validatethat it's aligned than ever before.
Sara (15:35):
Yeah.
Maria, what are you seeing?
Maria (15:38):
I completely agree with Natalie.
I am very much of a proponentto try to really combine the
tops down and the bottoms up.
And I have on occasion, more thanonce, suggested to clients that when
you get down to like L3 or L4, ifthat's how far down you go, that
you might not do the objectives, butthat you do KRs that are attached to
(15:59):
or connected, aligned with upline.
Because the alignment really happensmore at the KR level and then
what work is driving those KRs.
So that's what I'm seeing.
Because I feel quite strongly that ifyou have an organization, if you just
localize OKRs level one and level two,that means that the majority of the
(16:20):
organization still doesn't know howthey or their teams uniquely contribute
to the results of the business.
I do think that it's important thatteams further down in the organization
have that conversation about how are wecontributing to these outcomes, and how
will we know, and how are we doing that?
As opposed to, "Let's just stophere because it gets too complex."
(16:41):
I'd rather look for more kind ofscrappy ways of having teams do that.
Sara (16:46):
Super similar for me on localization.
I am working mostly with clientson company or top-level OKRs,
and then functional, one level offunctional localization, to make
sure that we are modeling bestpractices at those two levels.
And then some key results are localizing.
(17:06):
It's like where the math connectsdown, or where the math localizes
down, we localizing key results down.
But the model that I'm using nowactually adds to the one sheet the
concept of a milestone, and theconcept of a quantified activity
goal or SMART goal, and mandatories.
So when we do our level one or level two,and then like you, Maria, I'm an advocate
(17:29):
for bottoms up mostly beyond there,following the exact same model, but with
the definition that some teams might havemore mandatories than stretch key results.
Some teams might have more milestones.
If they just don't have the authorityor autonomy to contribute to
results, they might have one or twooperational key results, but not as
(17:52):
many key results and more milestones.
And sometimes a quantified activity or aSMART goal is the right tool for the job.
So that's the way I'm using it.
It's super similar.
It's that top-down, bottom-up, butthen having a coherent set of words
and meanings, because it's allsemantics with me, that then we can
(18:14):
choose the right tool for the jobwherever we are in the organization.
Okay.
Be thinking about things we don'tagree on, because we gotta have
some debate in our Q3 gathering.
Natalie (18:24):
Well, I have one maybe around culture.
Like, how much do you acknowledgeand bring culture into developing
your OKRs for a given company?
And it's vastly different culture from ascrappy, new technical company versus an
old, traditional, over 150-years business.
(18:44):
It's very different culture.
And how do we sprinkle culture in tomake sure that it stays in alignment
with their mission, vision, values?
Because they're very different.
That's one thing, to make sure that Ipay respect to and honor the culture
that I'm hearing in my interviews, andthat it's sprinkled throughout the OKRs.
Sara (19:00):
I'll start on this one because I think I'm in a really different position
than you two, so I think you canspeak better to that actual question.
I am working with clients rightnow who are who are specifically
invested in culture change inthe way that I bring to OKRs.
So by the time clients come to me, theyhave decided, "We have to accept the pain
(19:24):
of change. Please help us." And so I'min a really different position because
I'm working mostly with new-to-role CEOs,turnaround CEOs, and organizations that
know they need to transform in orderto continue to operate sustainably.
So they're already coming in,like bought in to OKRs as a
(19:49):
mechanism for culture change.
That's partly why, that'swho I work best with.
So that's partly why I am sooutspoken about the approaches
that I use, is because clientshave to be really pre-qualified.
Where I think you two work witha broader range of clients.
So I'd I love the question, Natalie.
I'd love to hear what you two areseeing in that front, working across
(20:13):
a more diverse set of clients.
Maria (20:15):
Yeah, so when I say I'm scrappy, I mean I also wanna just
introduce the timeline, right?
Because I don't like to go in once anddone and say, "Let's just help facilitate
and set OKRs one session," because Ithink all three of us have used kind
of the OK R journey as a way to talkabout the continuous improvement, right?
That nobody that I know of nailsOKRs the first time around, right?
(20:41):
Quarter over quarter, they get better.
And so the way I think aboutthis and the way I talk about
it is, where are they today?
What's their level of aspirationwhen it comes to OKRs?
Because not everyone is, oralready, or will be gung-ho about
this being the overall thing.
They might wanna be very surgicalabout how they're using it.
(21:02):
And I think the best way to use OKRsinitially is always the way that the
company are willing and able to adopt it.
So me talking about this is like thegold star way of doing OKRs, isn't gonna
help clients that are at the crawlinglevel and not 100% convinced yet.
I absolutely talk about the possibilitythat OKRs can have, but what I
(21:22):
end up ultimately, the way I do itis, what do I think that they can
actually accomplish in this quarter?
And what is the roadmapfor improvement over time?
Because part of that is also, what'sthe enablement and what is the
education and the kind of learning?
Because I have very much respect forsomething you do four times a year.
Anything we do four times a year, weare probably never gonna be masters at.
(21:46):
So I think that understanding,for us coming in, actually being
very good at spotting what'sgood and what's not and all that.
But the fact that they only do thisfour times a year makes it hard, right?
So I always think about this like,this quarter, that quarter, as opposed
to, this isn't any good right now,but what are they ready to get better
at this quarter versus next quarter?
Sara (22:09):
Yeah.
Great focus.
Natalie, what are you seeing?
Natalie (22:12):
Yeah, it's interesting.
There are some new certifications thathave come out too that anybody can
sign up and get their OKR certificationI will, however, say that folks who
do a quick training still need help.
They just haven't been in the trencheslong enough really to notice some of
those nuances, especially around culture.
And it takes a little bit moretime, and to Maria's point,
(22:33):
four times a year, you want thisconsistent rigor, every single time.
And within the teams.
I love the idea of hot-swappable coachesthat also help you drive the culture.
You don't have one coach that's justspecifically for technology teams or
just specifically for HR, but they'rehot-swappable, and they're sharing this
community of practice or community ofexcellence information also make sure
(22:56):
that the culture stays consistent, butalso the consistency and rigor in the
quality of OKRs that are helping build.
Sara (23:04):
Yeah, absolutely.
Maria brought upretrospectives and learning.
I think that if I had to pick onething, if I could only tell clients
one thing about OKRs, it would bewe spend all of our time focused on
writing them and then way too littletime focused on learning from them.
And so that's what I think all threeof us, that's something we have in
(23:26):
common is we balance the focus oncreation of OKRs is just the first step.
And then iterative, quarter over quarterlearning is what this is actually about.
But what are you seeing in thekind of retrospective arena, Maria?
What are you seeing work with clients?
Maria (23:44):
The best approach to retrospective is the one that the
company is able to adopt and actuallyexecute at that given point of time.
So I have the simple ones, the onesthat we used to do way back when,
what went really well, what couldhave gone better, what we wanna shift,
like those three basic questions.
Sometimes that is thebest the company can do.
Typically though, it generatesvery shallow responses, right?
(24:07):
If you're looking to actually reallyimprove, just asking those three
questions, unless the company isalready invested and really good at
it, you probably get insights thatare less helpful and less actionable
than they can and should be.
So I have that version, becausesometimes that's all they can do.
But I also have other approacheswhere there essentially is both
(24:30):
a review and a retrospective.
So it's the review of theactual OKRs, like how did all
these OKRs actually do and why.
But then in terms of the process,I have a model where I have five
building blocks that constituteshow you set up an OKR program.
And essentially it's whatwent well with this, right?
So how did we do on thesetting and aligning and OKRs?
(24:51):
How did we do on the quality of OKRs?
How did we do on how we execute them?
How did we do on the enablement of them?
And how did we do when it comesto kind of executive leadership?
What went well with this?
What could be better?
What do we need to shift?
That is one level more detail, right?
That does provide the chance of gettingmore and better and more insightful,
because it's more of a guided kindof conversation that helps them.
(25:14):
But sometimes companies aren'tready for that because they're
not used to having retrospectives.
So bringing anything up where I wouldadmit that I could have done something
better in some cultures, in someenvironments is not healthy or safe.
So maybe you start ata higher level, right?
And then work your way down by helpingthe organization realize that if
there's something inherent in theirculture or management practices
(25:37):
that makes these conversations lessuseful then they could and should be.
Sara (25:42):
Yeah.
How about you, Natalie?
Natalie (25:44):
I've had an interesting thing come up with my retrospectives because
again, I think everybody's running reallylean right now and more scrappy than
I've seen just because world is weird.
I've seen where teams say,yes, we are committed to these
OKRs, and we got them done.
And we have this other list ofwork, right, that wasn't captured
(26:05):
in OKRs, this to me is disaster.
Because everyone is supposed to be inagreement that the OKRs are empowering
teams to say no to other work.
And if they have two lists of strategywork that they're working from, and
one is sort of, you know, not reallycaptured anywhere in the OKR, this
is where I'm seeing a big problem.
(26:26):
Because people are over allocated,they're stretched too much, and
then they have competing priorities.
So this is a new thing I've seenin retrospectives, where they have
an agreed-upon OKR list and thenthey have the other stuff, which
is also critical strategy workand not run-the-business work.
This is a new thing I'm seeing.
I think also critical to callout, not only the wins, but the
(26:46):
do-differentlys, and then whatdidn't get any attention and why.
And some of that, those sage nuggetsthat come out, are like, this is culture.
This is really about change management.
And my good friend I worked within Saudi, Samira Memon, she's a
transformation specialist, and I can'ttell you how valuable that was to have
(27:08):
her transformation expertise help mein understanding some of the nuances
of the culture and the retrospectives.
So I don't know if you guys haveever partnered with a transformation
specialist, but she was phenomenal.
It was so much easier for me to getreally good information out of the
planning and retrospective sessionswith somebody who does transformation.
Sara (27:29):
Yeah.
Transformation is part of my generalistset, and I'm not that kind of expert,
but I would agree that the transformationskillset, the ops and mechanics of
transformation applied with OKRs, is howmy work has actually helps clients change.
So that, I would credit the transformationskillset You know, for the first
(27:51):
time in my practice, I had a clientcome in who already had high-quality
OKRs, and they were struggling withimplementation and specifically with
their recurring OKR check-in meetings.
My clients, the way we set things up,people are pretty independent by the
time we finish one or two quarters.
(28:12):
And I am seeing more clients sign on forlong-term support a really low level,
but just to reinforce the retrospectivesand the continuous learning.
Because.
OKRs are really hard.
We're talking about change,really hard for people to stick
(28:32):
with when it gets challenging.
So I have had so much fun workingwith that client who is utterly
capable of creating great OKRs.
They had fantastic training byanother provider before I came in.
Working with them around the recurringrhythm and how they achieve and learn
(28:54):
from their OKRs, I'm having so muchfun kind of staying with clients who
want that kind of ongoing support.
Because that's where change reallyhappens quarter over quarter.
Maria (29:07):
Indeed.
Sara (29:09):
That wraps up our first part of our Q2 OKR update with
Maria Rowcliffe and Natalie Webb.
I hope you found this discussion valuable,and I can't wait to hear your questions
Be sure to stick around for part two,where we'll continue our conversation
and tackle questions about top-downversus bottoms-up approaches to OKRs,
(29:30):
some different timing models for OKRs,and a few hot takes that we'll end with.
If you have questions aboutanything we discuss today or topics
you'd like us to cover when wegather again in Q3, don't wait.
Send them my way athello@redcurrentco.com, and that
email address is in the show notes.
(29:50):
We might just answer them beforeour next quarterly gathering, but
we'll for sure answer them then.
All right, friends, that's it for today.
Stay in the loop with everythinggoing on around here by
visiting findrc.co/newsletterand joining my mailing list.
Got questions?
(30:11):
My email addresses are too hard tospell, so visit findrc.co/contact
and shoot me a note that way.
You'll also find me at@saralobkovich on most of your
favorite social media platforms.
For today's show notes,visit findrc.co/thinkydoers.
If there's someone you'd like featuredon this podcast, drop me a note.
(30:34):
And if you know other Thinkydoers who'dbenefit from this episode, please share.
Your referrals, your word of mouth,and your reviews are much appreciated.
I'm looking forward to the questionsthis episode sparks for you, and I
look forward to seeing you next time.
Welcome to the Thinkydoers podcast.
Thinkydoers are those of us drawnto deep work, where thinking is
working, but we don't stop there.
We're compelled to move the work frominsight to idea, through the messy
middle, to find courage and confidenceto put our thoughts into action.
I'm your host, Sara Lobkovich.
(00:23):
I'm a strategy coach, a huge goal-settingand attainment nerd, and board-certified
health and wellness coach working atthe overlap of work life well-being I'm.
Also a Thinkydoer.
I'm here to help others find moresatisfaction, less frustration, less
friction, and more flow in our work.
(00:46):
My mission is to help changemakers likeyou transform our workplaces and world.
So let's get started.
All right, all, welcome.
I have a special treat for you today.
I'm here today with my OKR besties,Maria Rowcliffe and Natalie
(01:07):
Webb, for our Q2 2025 OKR update.
This became a quarterly gatheringafter we did the last one in Q1
and had so much fun, we decidedto do this live every quarter.
In this first part of our conversation,we'll have a little update on how we're
seeing generative AI being used in OKRpractice, the evolution of localization
(01:30):
and methods of cascading of OKRs, and howdifferent approaches to retrospectives
can drive organizational learning.
It's a packed discussion withinsights from all three of
us, so let's get started.
Sara (01:45):
Welcome, everyone, to this Q2.
It's weird, I keep losing track ofwhat month and quarter it is, but Q2
2025 OKR update with my OKR besties,Maria Rowcliffe and Natalie Webb.
We did this last quarter andhad so much fun, we decided
we're gonna do it quarterly.
I also think this earned us thenickname of the OKR Dream Team.
(02:08):
It just makes me so happy.
There are so many amazing voices on OKRs,and one of the things I absolutely love
is how much we are all in this together.
So, I'm Sara Lobkovich.
I'm your host of Thinkydoers.
I am the owner and operator of RedCurrant Collective and the author of
the new book, you are a Strategist: Use No-BS OKRs to get Big Things Done. (02:26):
undefined
came out in march in ebook, and thenprint launch was earlier this week with
independent availability as of yesterday.
You can get your copy mostplaces where books are sold.
And that book exists partly because ofthe two ladies that I'm on screen with,
(02:48):
encouraging me, marching to the beatof my own drummer in the OKR space.
Maria (02:52):
How do you feel, Sara, being up/down with it?
You've been working on this, Iwouldn't call the labor of love,
because I know there's also been alot of pain involved in getting there.
So, how do you feel now?
Sara (03:02):
It's really humbling.
That's what I'd say.
Maria (03:04):
Congratulations.
Sara (03:05):
Thank you.
And you two are next.
So, Natalie, go for it.
Let's tell folks who you are.
Natalie (03:10):
Natalie Webb, founder of Cloud Peak Enterprise Group.
I do OKR consulting all around the world.
I've been in it likeeight years, I guess, now.
And really happy to be herewith these two brilliant ladies.
I am a big fan of your book.
In fact, I'm taking it with me, andseveral other copies to Barcelona next
week, because there is a gatheringof OKR experts with OKR Mentors.
(03:33):
And we'll give it out maybe as prizesfor the folks attending Barcelona.
So, I'm stoked about that.
Congratulations, friend.
It's a wonderful book.
Sara (03:41):
Thank you.
I'm OKR Mentors alumni, and I wish Ihad the time to stay participating.
It's an awesome group.
Natalie, and then Maria, tellfolks who you are and what you do.
Maria (03:52):
Maria Rowcliffe.
I've been doing strategy developmentwith more of an emphasis on
execution for 25 years or so.
The last six or sevenyears more focused on OKRs.
I have found it to be the most impactfulway of aligning an organization
around strategic priorities.
My focus is more on the executionpart, which I think has something
(04:15):
to do with the fact that for over 10years have primarily had chief of staff
and had a business operations role,when I've been responsible for either
implementing OKRs or transformingor revamping a program that, for one
reason or another, isn't going well.
Sara (04:30):
Yeah.
And there's so much focus on creatingstrategy and OKRs, and so relatively
little on how to achieve it.
But let's start with generative AI.
It's still what everyone'stalking about in OKRs.
Every tool has some kind ofgenerative AI story at this point.
I would love to hear from you both, hasanything changed since we gathered last
(04:54):
in how you're using generative AI or howyou're seeing clients use generative AI?
Maria (04:59):
Yeah, I'm not seeing a change yet.
I'm not seeing a big shift.
I'm still seeing a huge interest in it.
There's more talk about thepotential of it, but I am not
seeing any real improvement.
What I am seeing is that every singleOKR platform, or any platform that
has goal setting or goal executionin it, now has an AI component,
(05:21):
which includes looking at helping toidentify objectives, key results, and
figure out alignment and all that.
So there's the mechanics of that,but I'm not seeing organizations
that are not using platformsusing AI in either developing
their OKRs or executing on them.
Natalie (05:40):
Yeah.
I've seen a shift from Q1 to Q2around a new metric, called TRV.
I don't know if you guys have heard it.
And it's almost sort of a blendof KPIs and OKRs at the same time.
The definition, it'sTechnology Realized Value.
You can apply it to financial,operational, or experiential types
of technology, but it's really aroundthat technology investment, and are you
(06:03):
getting the return on the investment?
A lot of Big Five consulting firms areusing that too in collaboration with OKRs.
And what I'm seeing they're doing isputting in some of the summary details
about a project or a big program,multi-quarter, multi-year program,
and using generative AI to say whatare the themes that are coming up in
(06:25):
some of the interviewing feedback.
I have come to find, even just this year,these early one-on-one conversations
I have with executives in preparationfor an on-site meeting are so hugely
beneficial because themes start emergingand they want to see that executive
summary of those themes, which is,tell us what our people are saying.
(06:46):
One of the questions I always ask in myinterview questions in preparation for
on-site is, "What are your potentialmoonshot ideas? What would you do
if you had a magic wand, unlimitedpeople, time, money?" And those turn
into some really great hotbeds of OKRs.
So I'm seeing that using AI on a privateenvironment is really valuable because it
(07:08):
gives you the themes and the percentagesof information so that you can net
out to the client what you're seeing.
Sara (07:14):
Can I sit right in between?
I'm using it in a similar way.
I have private instances that are closedoff, where I anonymize customer data
and have trained models to processmeeting notes to look for insight or
ideas, yes, potential OKRs could be.
It's not a replacement for thecoaching, because I have experimented
(07:36):
with using my model to develop a draftobjective for clients, and they don't
remember it if they don't develop it.
It's not a replacement.
But I am finding it to be a bit ofan accelerator in getting people
from that endless discussion andbeing hesitant to get to a decision.
It's like, I can cut off the discussionand say, "Let me ask my model what
(07:57):
it thinks," and then come back andsay, "All right, here's a candidate,
discuss." So, that's how I'm using it.
I became aware of actually becauseof Ben Lamorte talking about it and
posting about it, OKR chat models beingreleased by people with absolutely no
sourcing of what they're trained on.
And so, I would say there's a cautionright now that I trust the platforms
(08:21):
that are implementing, subject towhatever their terms of use are, but OKR
platforms implementing with some kind ofgenerative AI, I kind of trust, because
at least they're in the OKR business.
And then generative AI workbeing done by other OKR
professionals that are identified.
Cool.
But man, clients are gonna get hurt.
(08:41):
Users are gonna get hurt by anonymousmodels that don't have sourcing.
And as a content creator, justkills me to see elements of my work.
It's like, you can see whereyou've been the training.
Natalie (08:56):
Yeah.
Sara (08:57):
And I just, can't wait till we can source back Who has
trained what on my materials.
Let's see.
Because that part ofit is just super shady.
Maria (09:08):
Yeah.
I am a little bit, in your camp in termsof how I use, because I use it myself.
And one thing that has improved sincelast quarter is that the instances of
myself that I have created, because Ihave to have quite a few doing different
things for me, so I am no longer a team ofone, I'm a team of actually six or seven
that I have that do different things.
(09:29):
But I would say that has become better.
Because in the first quarter, when Istarted more using it, I was fighting
it to go, it would give me back thingsthat, "No, this is not a KR... no,
this is absolutely not an objective."So I think that the quality of
what I get back has become better.
But I'm not seeing clientsdo that on their own.
(09:49):
So it might be that I amsharing some examples.
And again, I'm more focusingon the leading indicators.
because I think that is where AI canactually help the most, because those
are the ones that aren't as intuitiveas the regular lagging indicators.
I would say, though, that I've alsotried a lot of these OKR generators
that are on some company websites.
I'm not gonna name names.
(10:11):
And I would say that what they comeup with are not things that the three
of us would say, "That's a greatobjective," or "That's a great KR."
But that was even a problem, I think,for me when I was advising clients on
which platform to potentially go with.
Because I was just like, if youare looking at platforms, look
at the definition that they haveand the examples that they have
(10:32):
of objectives and key results.
Because if they have examples of KRin particular, which is my biggest pet
peeve, that are just milestones andactivities and the kind of stuff you
actually should be managing as partof program management, if that is the
examples they have, any training material,anything that they have on their website,
everything that they might generateas part of an AI generator for OKRs
(10:55):
or whatever, it's gonna include that.
And so it's gonna lead you downa path that are gonna make OKRs
a less impactful methodology foryour company to implement than not.
Sara (11:07):
Yeah, absolutely.
I'm also in that process of trainingavatar mes, because I figured if
other people are training modelson my work, then why can't I?
I think we're gonna continueto see a lot of attention here.
There's so much focus on OKRs, butI feel like it's constricting a bit.
It's one of the reasons I'm glad to haveanother OKR book out in the world right
(11:29):
now, because we need to drive awareness,and drive awareness that OKRs that people
saw in 2016 or 2017, what we're doingnow bears little resemblance to what was.
Being done in the earlieriterations of OKRs.
So, on the one hand, if all this focusand stuff enables people to try OKRs
(11:50):
and then figure out that it can be donebetter than what generic models are
providing in terms of support — cool.
I just really hope that we don'tsee people play with OKR generators
and think that that's what OKRs are.
Natalie (12:05):
I think I'm in that camp.
And you mentioned what Ben did.
I've seen some generated OKRs, andthe theory of it, the textbook of
it, I guess, meets the criteria.
But what is missing, even when I'vebeen in sessions and folks in the room
have used a generator to say, "Oh,this whatever AI tool says, this is a
perfectly worded key result," and I say,"Yes." But this is where I think that
(12:29):
the consulting comes in, is this reallydriving the value you wanted to achieve?
How do you know?
Who cares, right?
Then, so what?
So what happens if thisis done or not done?
And some of those things that don'tget asked, I think are so critically
important to make sure that peopleare focused on the right work.
It could be written very well, butit also could be missing the mark
(12:49):
completely on the value you're expecting.
to get from it.
Sara (12:52):
Yeah.
So to put a bow on the generativeAI conversation, the takeaway that
I'm gonna reinforce that came fromboth of you is, one of the places
models can be particularly helpfulis in solving the problems that
humans are having trouble solving.
Maria mentioned leading indicators, andthen Natalie, you mentioned getting to
what's really contributing to results.
(13:13):
That's a place I'm rightthere with you too.
When clients are having a hard timedeveloping leading indicators, I
usually can, but I don't wanna offer.
I'm a coach.
I don't offer the answer;I ask the questions.
But it has been interesting toplay with a trained model that is
(13:33):
skilled at identifying possibleleading indicators, because it helps
clients see what we're talking about.
It's like it gives them a relevant,local example, and then they're like,
"That's not it, but that lets me knowwhat we're aiming for." Because I
think that is one of the things that,generic examples, especially like
generic examples of objectives andkey results, are good teaching tools.
(13:55):
But generic examples of leadingindicators, people just don't get it.
So I think that's a good takeaway fromthis is, that's one of the uses that
all three of us are seeing value in.
Okay, so then our next topic islocalization or cascading and what
is changing or evolving in practicesaround localization and cascading.
(14:17):
And for folks who are less familiarwith objectives and key results,
that is the process of moving OKRsthrough an organization, where we
have company-level objectives andkey results that might localize to
functional orgs and localize to teams.
And I'm super curious to hear whatyou two are seeing in localization.
(14:40):
Let's start with Natalie for this one.
Natalie (14:42):
Yeah, it's really interesting because I'm working
right now with a couple companiesthat are globally matrixed.
And it's particularly interestingin this geopolitical climate
around tariffs, right?
We're seeing some new challengesthat have not bubbled up before.
So ever more important to have reallyclear, focused, and transparent
(15:03):
OKRs at the functional team levels,and that we're doing that check
between leadership and the functionalteams and there's not any misses.
And I'm finding there's more misseswhere I work with a functional team
and they say, "These are our moststrategic things that we have to get
done in the next 90 days," And thentheir leadership says, "Well, what
about these three other things?" Right?
(15:23):
And I'm like, Well, they didn't mentionthose, so let's make sure we don't have
any misses, and then we have to adjust."And so I'm seeing the localization
be even more important to validatethat it's aligned than ever before.
Sara (15:35):
Yeah.
Maria, what are you seeing?
Maria (15:38):
I completely agree with Natalie.
I am very much of a proponentto try to really combine the
tops down and the bottoms up.
And I have on occasion, more thanonce, suggested to clients that when
you get down to like L3 or L4, ifthat's how far down you go, that
you might not do the objectives, butthat you do KRs that are attached to
(15:59):
or connected, aligned with upline.
Because the alignment really happensmore at the KR level and then
what work is driving those KRs.
So that's what I'm seeing.
Because I feel quite strongly that ifyou have an organization, if you just
localize OKRs level one and level two,that means that the majority of the
(16:20):
organization still doesn't know howthey or their teams uniquely contribute
to the results of the business.
I do think that it's important thatteams further down in the organization
have that conversation about how are wecontributing to these outcomes, and how
will we know, and how are we doing that?
As opposed to, "Let's just stophere because it gets too complex."
(16:41):
I'd rather look for more kind ofscrappy ways of having teams do that.
Sara (16:46):
Super similar for me on localization.
I am working mostly with clientson company or top-level OKRs,
and then functional, one level offunctional localization, to make
sure that we are modeling bestpractices at those two levels.
And then some key results are localizing.
(17:06):
It's like where the math connectsdown, or where the math localizes
down, we localizing key results down.
But the model that I'm using nowactually adds to the one sheet the
concept of a milestone, and theconcept of a quantified activity
goal or SMART goal, and mandatories.
So when we do our level one or level two,and then like you, Maria, I'm an advocate
(17:29):
for bottoms up mostly beyond there,following the exact same model, but with
the definition that some teams might havemore mandatories than stretch key results.
Some teams might have more milestones.
If they just don't have the authorityor autonomy to contribute to
results, they might have one or twooperational key results, but not as
(17:52):
many key results and more milestones.
And sometimes a quantified activity or aSMART goal is the right tool for the job.
So that's the way I'm using it.
It's super similar.
It's that top-down, bottom-up, butthen having a coherent set of words
and meanings, because it's allsemantics with me, that then we can
(18:14):
choose the right tool for the jobwherever we are in the organization.
Okay.
Be thinking about things we don'tagree on, because we gotta have
some debate in our Q3 gathering.
Natalie (18:24):
Well, I have one maybe around culture.
Like, how much do you acknowledgeand bring culture into developing
your OKRs for a given company?
And it's vastly different culture from ascrappy, new technical company versus an
old, traditional, over 150-years business.
(18:44):
It's very different culture.
And how do we sprinkle culture in tomake sure that it stays in alignment
with their mission, vision, values?
Because they're very different.
That's one thing, to make sure that Ipay respect to and honor the culture
that I'm hearing in my interviews, andthat it's sprinkled throughout the OKRs.
Sara (19:00):
I'll start on this one because I think I'm in a really different position
than you two, so I think you canspeak better to that actual question.
I am working with clients rightnow who are who are specifically
invested in culture change inthe way that I bring to OKRs.
So by the time clients come to me, theyhave decided, "We have to accept the pain
(19:24):
of change. Please help us." And so I'min a really different position because
I'm working mostly with new-to-role CEOs,turnaround CEOs, and organizations that
know they need to transform in orderto continue to operate sustainably.
So they're already coming in,like bought in to OKRs as a
(19:49):
mechanism for culture change.
That's partly why, that'swho I work best with.
So that's partly why I am sooutspoken about the approaches
that I use, is because clientshave to be really pre-qualified.
Where I think you two work witha broader range of clients.
So I'd I love the question, Natalie.
I'd love to hear what you two areseeing in that front, working across
(20:13):
a more diverse set of clients.
Maria (20:15):
Yeah, so when I say I'm scrappy, I mean I also wanna just
introduce the timeline, right?
Because I don't like to go in once anddone and say, "Let's just help facilitate
and set OKRs one session," because Ithink all three of us have used kind
of the OK R journey as a way to talkabout the continuous improvement, right?
That nobody that I know of nailsOKRs the first time around, right?
(20:41):
Quarter over quarter, they get better.
And so the way I think aboutthis and the way I talk about
it is, where are they today?
What's their level of aspirationwhen it comes to OKRs?
Because not everyone is, oralready, or will be gung-ho about
this being the overall thing.
They might wanna be very surgicalabout how they're using it.
(21:02):
And I think the best way to use OKRsinitially is always the way that the
company are willing and able to adopt it.
So me talking about this is like thegold star way of doing OKRs, isn't gonna
help clients that are at the crawlinglevel and not 100% convinced yet.
I absolutely talk about the possibilitythat OKRs can have, but what I
(21:22):
end up ultimately, the way I do itis, what do I think that they can
actually accomplish in this quarter?
And what is the roadmapfor improvement over time?
Because part of that is also, what'sthe enablement and what is the
education and the kind of learning?
Because I have very much respect forsomething you do four times a year.
Anything we do four times a year, weare probably never gonna be masters at.
(21:46):
So I think that understanding,for us coming in, actually being
very good at spotting what'sgood and what's not and all that.
But the fact that they only do thisfour times a year makes it hard, right?
So I always think about this like,this quarter, that quarter, as opposed
to, this isn't any good right now,but what are they ready to get better
at this quarter versus next quarter?
Sara (22:09):
Yeah.
Great focus.
Natalie, what are you seeing?
Natalie (22:12):
Yeah, it's interesting.
There are some new certifications thathave come out too that anybody can
sign up and get their OKR certificationI will, however, say that folks who
do a quick training still need help.
They just haven't been in the trencheslong enough really to notice some of
those nuances, especially around culture.
And it takes a little bit moretime, and to Maria's point,
(22:33):
four times a year, you want thisconsistent rigor, every single time.
And within the teams.
I love the idea of hot-swappable coachesthat also help you drive the culture.
You don't have one coach that's justspecifically for technology teams or
just specifically for HR, but they'rehot-swappable, and they're sharing this
community of practice or community ofexcellence information also make sure
(22:56):
that the culture stays consistent, butalso the consistency and rigor in the
quality of OKRs that are helping build.
Sara (23:04):
Yeah, absolutely.
Maria brought upretrospectives and learning.
I think that if I had to pick onething, if I could only tell clients
one thing about OKRs, it would bewe spend all of our time focused on
writing them and then way too littletime focused on learning from them.
And so that's what I think all threeof us, that's something we have in
(23:26):
common is we balance the focus oncreation of OKRs is just the first step.
And then iterative, quarter over quarterlearning is what this is actually about.
But what are you seeing in thekind of retrospective arena, Maria?
What are you seeing work with clients?
Maria (23:44):
The best approach to retrospective is the one that the
company is able to adopt and actuallyexecute at that given point of time.
So I have the simple ones, the onesthat we used to do way back when,
what went really well, what couldhave gone better, what we wanna shift,
like those three basic questions.
Sometimes that is thebest the company can do.
Typically though, it generatesvery shallow responses, right?
(24:07):
If you're looking to actually reallyimprove, just asking those three
questions, unless the company isalready invested and really good at
it, you probably get insights thatare less helpful and less actionable
than they can and should be.
So I have that version, becausesometimes that's all they can do.
But I also have other approacheswhere there essentially is both
(24:30):
a review and a retrospective.
So it's the review of theactual OKRs, like how did all
these OKRs actually do and why.
But then in terms of the process,I have a model where I have five
building blocks that constituteshow you set up an OKR program.
And essentially it's whatwent well with this, right?
So how did we do on thesetting and aligning and OKRs?
(24:51):
How did we do on the quality of OKRs?
How did we do on how we execute them?
How did we do on the enablement of them?
And how did we do when it comesto kind of executive leadership?
What went well with this?
What could be better?
What do we need to shift?
That is one level more detail, right?
That does provide the chance of gettingmore and better and more insightful,
because it's more of a guided kindof conversation that helps them.
(25:14):
But sometimes companies aren'tready for that because they're
not used to having retrospectives.
So bringing anything up where I wouldadmit that I could have done something
better in some cultures, in someenvironments is not healthy or safe.
So maybe you start ata higher level, right?
And then work your way down by helpingthe organization realize that if
there's something inherent in theirculture or management practices
(25:37):
that makes these conversations lessuseful then they could and should be.
Sara (25:42):
Yeah.
How about you, Natalie?
Natalie (25:44):
I've had an interesting thing come up with my retrospectives because
again, I think everybody's running reallylean right now and more scrappy than
I've seen just because world is weird.
I've seen where teams say,yes, we are committed to these
OKRs, and we got them done.
And we have this other list ofwork, right, that wasn't captured
(26:05):
in OKRs, this to me is disaster.
Because everyone is supposed to be inagreement that the OKRs are empowering
teams to say no to other work.
And if they have two lists of strategywork that they're working from, and
one is sort of, you know, not reallycaptured anywhere in the OKR, this
is where I'm seeing a big problem.
(26:26):
Because people are over allocated,they're stretched too much, and
then they have competing priorities.
So this is a new thing I've seenin retrospectives, where they have
an agreed-upon OKR list and thenthey have the other stuff, which
is also critical strategy workand not run-the-business work.
This is a new thing I'm seeing.
I think also critical to callout, not only the wins, but the
(26:46):
do-differentlys, and then whatdidn't get any attention and why.
And some of that, those sage nuggetsthat come out, are like, this is culture.
This is really about change management.
And my good friend I worked within Saudi, Samira Memon, she's a
transformation specialist, and I can'ttell you how valuable that was to have
(27:08):
her transformation expertise help mein understanding some of the nuances
of the culture and the retrospectives.
So I don't know if you guys haveever partnered with a transformation
specialist, but she was phenomenal.
It was so much easier for me to getreally good information out of the
planning and retrospective sessionswith somebody who does transformation.
Sara (27:29):
Yeah.
Transformation is part of my generalistset, and I'm not that kind of expert,
but I would agree that the transformationskillset, the ops and mechanics of
transformation applied with OKRs, is howmy work has actually helps clients change.
So that, I would credit the transformationskillset You know, for the first
(27:51):
time in my practice, I had a clientcome in who already had high-quality
OKRs, and they were struggling withimplementation and specifically with
their recurring OKR check-in meetings.
My clients, the way we set things up,people are pretty independent by the
time we finish one or two quarters.
(28:12):
And I am seeing more clients sign on forlong-term support a really low level,
but just to reinforce the retrospectivesand the continuous learning.
Because.
OKRs are really hard.
We're talking about change,really hard for people to stick
(28:32):
with when it gets challenging.
So I have had so much fun workingwith that client who is utterly
capable of creating great OKRs.
They had fantastic training byanother provider before I came in.
Working with them around the recurringrhythm and how they achieve and learn
(28:54):
from their OKRs, I'm having so muchfun kind of staying with clients who
want that kind of ongoing support.
Because that's where change reallyhappens quarter over quarter.
Maria (29:07):
Indeed.
Sara (29:09):
That wraps up our first part of our Q2 OKR update with
Maria Rowcliffe and Natalie Webb.
I hope you found this discussion valuable,and I can't wait to hear your questions
Be sure to stick around for part two,where we'll continue our conversation
and tackle questions about top-downversus bottoms-up approaches to OKRs,
(29:30):
some different timing models for OKRs,and a few hot takes that we'll end with.
If you have questions aboutanything we discuss today or topics
you'd like us to cover when wegather again in Q3, don't wait.
Send them my way athello@redcurrentco.com, and that
email address is in the show notes.
(29:50):
We might just answer them beforeour next quarterly gathering, but
we'll for sure answer them then.
All right, friends, that's it for today.
Stay in the loop with everythinggoing on around here by
visiting findrc.co/newsletterand joining my mailing list.
Got questions?
(30:11):
My email addresses are too hard tospell, so visit findrc.co/contact
and shoot me a note that way.
You'll also find me at@saralobkovich on most of your
favorite social media platforms.
For today's show notes,visit findrc.co/thinkydoers.
If there's someone you'd like featuredon this podcast, drop me a note.
(30:34):
And if you know other Thinkydoers who'dbenefit from this episode, please share.
Your referrals, your word of mouth,and your reviews are much appreciated.
I'm looking forward to the questionsthis episode sparks for you, and I
look forward to seeing you next time.
Popular Podcasts
Bookmarked by Reese's Book Club
Welcome to Bookmarked by Reese’s Book Club — the podcast where great stories, bold women, and irresistible conversations collide! Hosted by award-winning journalist Danielle Robay, each week new episodes balance thoughtful literary insight with the fervor of buzzy book trends, pop culture and more. Bookmarked brings together celebrities, tastemakers, influencers and authors from Reese's Book Club and beyond to share stories that transcend the page. Pull up a chair. You’re not just listening — you’re part of the conversation.
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com