The OKR Trio is back with Part 2 of their brutally honest Q2 2025 forecast, and they're not holding back.
Sara Lobkovich, Maria Rowcliffe, and Natalie Webb tackle the questions you've been asking about rigid vs. flexible OKR approaches, timing models that actually work, and trends we’re seeing in tool choices.
But here's where it gets spicy: they're sharing their most controversial OKR opinions, speed round style!
From leaders trying to weaponize OKRs as surveillance tools to the popular (but problematic) advice to limit teams to just one strategic priority, this conversation will challenge norms you might not be able to imagine actually exist out there.
You'll discover why monthly check-ins might mean you're tracking instead of managing, how geography is shaping OKR strategy differently across continents, and why Excel is making a surprising comeback in the enterprise. Plus, Sara drops a financial metrics hot take that might make your CFO squirm.
This isn't your typical goal-setting advice. It's three veteran practitioners sharing what they're really seeing in the field, complete with the controversies, contradictions, and hard-won insights that only come from years in the trenches.
Episode Highlights:
- Quarterly vs. Trimesterly Planning: why the Q4 “drop-off” is real—and how cadence choices impact OKR adoption across teams
- Biweekly Reinforcement Loops: how one leadership team’s consistent review rhythm is accelerating organization-wide buy-in
- Tool Sprawl & Excel Resurgence: why many orgs are ditching premium OKR platforms for scrappier, process-first setups
- When Tools Hurt More Than Help: the danger of letting project management tools define your key results
- Hot Takes on OKRs: financial metrics don’t belong in key results (and one-size-fits-all “just one OKR” advice? Hard pass)
- Big Brother OKRs?: pushing back when leadership wants to use OKRs for surveillance instead of strategy
- Q3 Preview: a deep dive on execution, achievement—and how to actually decide what OKR tooling makes sense for your org
Key Concepts Explored:
- Hybrid Localization Approaches
- Leadership sets objectives, teams shape Key Results
- Themes as bridges when objectives don't translate locally
- KRs and Sub-KRs for fast-moving Scrum teams
- Moving away from rigid objective cascading
- Timing Model Evolution
- Biweekly check-ins integrated with Scrum cycles
- The discipline of at least twice-weekly KR management
- Quarterly vs. trimester cycle trade-offs
- Event-triggered OKR adjustments for volatile environments
- Tool Integration Strategies
- Process-first, tool-second implementation approach
- Excel resurgence due to cost considerations
- Avoiding dueling OKR and project management platforms
- Recognition that L1 and L2 math doesn't require specialty software
- Controversial Practices and Hot Takes
- OKRs as surveillance tools (problematic)
- Arbitrary "one OKR only" mandates (counterproductive)
- Financial metrics as KPIs vs. Key Results (contentious)
- Project deliverables masquerading as OKRs (misleading)
Notable Quotes:
"If you have a KR that you only manage monthly, you are not managing it, you're tracking it. Because you essentially have two data points, and then the quarter is over." — Maria Rowcliffe [00:06:00]
"Once we learn the words and leadership is modeling the words and meanings, then the rigidity can come out of the framework." — Sara Lobkovich [00:04:00]
"Financial metrics belong in mandatories and budgets. They're KPIs, they aren't key results." — Sara Lobkovich [00:15:00]
"Bad news only gets worse with time. So the earlier they can
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.
Sara (00:53):
Welcome back for the second part of this Q2 2025 OKR update with
Maria Rowcliffe and Natalie Webb.
If you haven't listened to part one,go back and check that out first,
where we discuss an update to ourperspectives on generative AI and OKRs,
the evolution we're seeing in localizingand cascading practices, and how
(01:14):
different retrospective approaches candrive organizational and OKR learning.
In the second part, we're gonna diveinto some great questions from listeners
about rigid versus flexible OKRmodels, different timing approaches,
managing OKRs across differenttools and different teams, and we'll
even end with a few OKR hot takes.
(01:37):
Each of us brings a uniqueperspective based on our diverse
client experiences, so you get areally well-rounded view of what's
happening in the OKR world right now.
Let's jump back in.
One of the questions that camein was, are companies shifting
from rigid top-down or bottom-upmodels to something more blended?
(02:01):
For example, leadership sets theobjectives, teams shape the KRs.
What are you seeing in terms ofrigid execution of an OKR model
versus more flexible approaches?
Maria (02:12):
The clients I work with are doing more of that because
they're working with me.
They already have a process wherethey are doing the localization in the
way that they are, and it's working.
And nobody actually thinks it'soverly bureaucratic, and they get
the outcomes that they need from it.
I am not telling them to change, right?
If oftentimes the struggle is that they'renot getting the results that they want
(02:33):
to, people are beginning to say, “Whyare we doing this again?” Then that's
what I typically propose to them to try.
Sara (02:40):
How about you, Natalie?
Natalie (02:41):
Yeah, you know, some companies always have some weird old thing.
They have something that they wannaretire or sunset, and it's typically
some old waterfall... something weird.
So I'm seeing more of a blend.
And I see the teams thatare moving really fast.
They don't have lots of layersof objectives, but they almost
have like KRs and Sub-KRs.
I find those folks to be more trulyScrum-agile folks versus some of the
(03:05):
other stuff that's like sunsetting an oldsystem that doesn't have support anymore.
More traditional waterfall.
So I think there's always a blend for me.
And it's interesting that everybodyhas somewhere weird old thing
that they need to get rid of.
It's like, just unplug thatserver and see who calls, because
it's just a mess, you know?
But they're always trying to figureout how to sunset it or replace it, it
(03:26):
seems, or upgrade, like, I'm hearinga lot of SAP to HANA happening.
Oracle as well.
So yeah, it's a blend for me.
Sara (03:37):
I've always been a little bit different on this front.
That to me, "objectives" is aword and "key results" is a word,
and they fit into a strategicmodel with other words in them.
So the rigid approach to OKRs,I use a structured or scaffolded
approach in the first quarter.
Or if a team struggles to learn quicklyand adopt quickly, the first two quarters.
(04:03):
But then my mature state is atremendous amount of flexibility.
It's like, once we learn the wordsand leadership is modeling the words
and meanings, then the rigiditycan come out of the framework.
We just have shared language and behavior,and we know what those words mean and
we can use them where we need them.
I'm also in the same camp ofless localizing of objectives.
(04:26):
I find alignment to be more coherentwhen we do less objective localization.
I still use themes for each objective.
And so if the objective doesn't make senseto a local team, the theme usually does.
And if they wanna write anobjective for some reason, they can.
But yeah, I'm seeing thesame thing as an efficiency.
So the approaches that I use, yeah,we start out structured and scaffolded
(04:50):
just until we learn the words andmeanings, and then things can get much
more flexible in terms of approach.
This also leads into the next questionthat we got, which is, what are your
thoughts on different timing models?
Annual, quarterly, trimester, rolling,event-triggered, like for product
(05:11):
launches, acquisitions, leadershipchanges, etc. Natalie, what are you
seeing in terms of timing models?
Natalie (05:20):
Yeah, I'm seeing a variation.
when I'm working with a Scrum team.
They're incorporating their OKRcheck-ins every two weeks with
their Scrums, which is great.
But other teams that are not running Scrumsprints are doing more monthly updates,
weekly, biweekly, and then monthly.
So the timing is different, Ithink, depending on the team.
Maria (05:41):
So this might be one way we disagree a little bit.
Yeah.
So I actually wrote a post aboutthis because I am of the opinion
that if you have a KR that youonly manage monthly, you are not
managing it, you're tracking it.
Because you essentially have two datapoints, and then the quarter is over.
And yes, there still might be someenvironments or for some KRS where the
(06:02):
shift is so slow that monthly is okay.
I would argue that there'svery few of those, and I
can't really come up with one.
And so I think if you don'tlook at it at least twice a
week, you're not managing it.
You're tracking it.
Because things are changing so fastnow, and I think it's hard that if
you don't have a habit of actuallymanaging on a more ongoing basis,
(06:27):
it becomes not important, right?
That's why many of these monthlybusiness reviews ends up being just
not discussions around what gotin the way, what do we need to do,
because that might have happenedseveral weeks ago and we moved on.
And we are not gonna actually know ifwe did the right thing until next month.
So I really believe in thediscipline of doing it at least
(06:49):
biweekly, preferably weekly.
And it doesn't mean that it hasto be a heavy hand in terms of
spending hours and hours on it.
But somebody, and preferably the team, atany point is gonna be able to articulate,
how are we doing on this KR and why?
Doesn't mean that it has to behalf a day discussion of it.
But if the point is to actively manageoutcomes, the way I think about it is
(07:12):
reduce or eliminate surprises, right?
So that when at the end of the quarteryou don't say, "Is there something that
happened that we could have learnedabout earlier and then actually take
action on?" Then I think that it isthat the more recurring cycle is needed.
And again, if the things that you areactively trying to manage are slow
(07:33):
moving, then maybe monthly is enough.
But I don't know many thingsthat are like that anymore.
Natalie (07:38):
I can throw a couple out and see if you agree.
Um, legal, merger and acquisition,tax team, surveys, customer
surveys under customer set.
Some of that stuff doesn't move that fast.
Technology, i'm with you.
Bad news only gets worse with time.
So the earlier they can raisean issue, I think the better.
Maria (07:55):
I would argue though that if there's something that they don't have to
check in on every week or know how it isgoing, then they might have the wrong KRs.
Then there's actually KPIs more,that is, more health checks.
So KRs, in my mind, should be somethingthat you're actively looking to improve.
If it's just a health metric, thenabsolutely, once a month might be fine.
Sara (08:12):
The other thing I'm seeing too is I was one of the folks who was
advocating for longer OKR cycles, liketrimester as opposed to quarterly,
and now, totally reversed course.
Quarterly is even hard, for someclients right now with the volatility
in the operating environment.
And I am seeing clientsdeveloping less key results,
(08:34):
also because of the volatility.
So there's more development of mandatoriesor commits that have to be achieved.
And then I am seeing a little bit fewer.
But on that time horizon question, in theUS, different overseas, like it's so cool
to be working in the US and Australiabecause Australia's just humming along.
(08:56):
Like, We're doing whatwe always...” you know?
And then my messaging in the US rightnow is "strategy during chaos" and my
messaging in Australia is "go team."
Maria (09:04):
Yeah.
Sara (09:05):
That is something where I've changed, because I was working with
clients around that shift to trimesterly.
What I find with trimesterlyimplementations is we don't lose
Q4, where with the quarterlyimplementations, we tend to lose
Q4 because we're focused on Q1.
But the other reason I'm going back toquarterly is actually this leadership
team that I'm working on a biweekly basis.
(09:27):
So I facilitate their OKR review biweekly.
With most implementations, we havethose early adopters, and then
there might be people who don'tjust lag, they just perma-resist.
And what I'm seeing with this groupis that every two-week learning and
reinforcement is bringing everyone along.
(09:47):
Like, they're really makingbig progress on adoption.
So yeah, I've, that's the placewhere my thinking has changed.
I have a last question.
I'm gonna spring on you.
But let's do a lightning answer to ourlast viewer question, which was: With
tool sprawl, are orgs more likely to foldOKRs into what they're already using,
(10:12):
like Notion, Asana, Salesforce, insteadof managing separate OKR platforms?
What are you seeing, Natalie?
Natalie (10:20):
I'm seeing more Excel use than ever, actually.
And I think it's to get away from the ARRof the seat cost of some of the tools.
Sara (10:29):
How about you, Maria?
Maria (10:30):
Yes.
Because I do think that part of whatwe do when we talk to clients these
days, identify why you're doing this,and then figure out what the process is
gonna be, and then figure out what theway you're gonna be managing things.
Because if it's a tool-led thingand you start with the tool, and
then the process isn't there, wedon't advise clients to do that.
Doesn't mean that we won't, at the endof the day, suggest that they might
(10:51):
get one, but that's not where to start.
And so I'm definitely seeingthe more scrappy as well.
And Excel is probably theone that I see the most also.
Natalie (11:03):
Yeah.
Sara (11:03):
I am also seeing, it's similar for me.
Because so much of the mathhappens at L1 and L2, that can be
managed without specialty software.
Where I am still seeing specialtysoftware adoption is in organizations
that don't have an existing,kind of coherent, approach to
(11:27):
program and project management.
So that is somewhere where the tools help,because then we don't have that dueling
OKR platform and project managementkind of conflict that we run into.
If they've got a really establishedprogram and project management
mechanism, then I just remindclients, don't let the project and
program management eat the OKRs.
(11:49):
Like you have to really definethe behaviors and what we're
doing so that we don't wind upwith just project management.
Natalie (11:58):
It's like teams are using what works for them.
Maria (12:01):
Yeah.
I would argue that the tools, thatthe project management tools out
there that have added on OKRs, tendto also have examples of OKRs that are
project deliverables and milestones.
Because that's theirbread and butter, right?
And so I typically say (12:15):
use stuff for project management, because they're great.
But these are not what you actuallywanna be managing, because you're
already managing those here.
So why would you convert that and callkey results when you already have a
process and a tool for doing that?
Sara (12:31):
Okay, so let's do another, I'm gonna add something else to our
Q3 agenda, and let's talk about howto make the decision on tooling.
So we're not gonna talk about specifictools, but let's talk about, like, how
you advise clients about tooling, andwhat we've, because we've all worked
on the tool side, and we've workedon the services side, so I think that
(12:52):
would be really helpful for folks.
I'm gonna ask one last question of you.
And it's okay to take a minute tothink about it, because I didn't have
this one in our plan, but then I waslike, oh, this is cool to talk about.
So, what is the most controversial thingyou can think of in your OKR practice?
(13:13):
What are you doing or saying thatyou think other people would be
like, "Oh my gosh, that's nuts"?
Natalie (13:17):
I have one.
I've had a few leaders want me to useOKRs as Big Brother to spy on their
teams, and that's just so shady.
I really don't like that.
It was never meant to be that way.
And so that's one thingI really push back on.
It's like, if you need to furtherexamine a team and how they're
performing, I say lean in and dothat internally, and don't use OKRs
as a guise to a Big Brother, a team.
(13:41):
That's the one I'm like, yuck.
Maria (13:42):
One thing that I object very much to, and I know that this is,
there's a lot of people that advocatefor teams only setting one or two OKRs.
You should just have one.
There should be one strategic priority.
And I am so against that.
And I think back to your point,Natalie, then you're gonna have this
one KR that just hangs out there,and then all these other things
that people are spending time on.
And so the ability to useyour OKR to understand what
(14:05):
to say no to is non-existent.
So the whole idea about making workpurposeful has essentially gone away.
And so that is one thing that I havea few pet peeves that I'm like, “Don't
do that.” And I think there's a lot ofpeople out there advocating for, “You
should only have one strategic priority.
One OKR per quarter, or two.” That, tome that arbitrarily, I absolutely am for
(14:27):
having focus, but arbitrarily setting oneis just, yeah, I'm very much against it.
Sara (14:36):
That's good food for thought for me.
I don't recommend setting one, butI do sometimes have teams that only
create one objective and some keyresults, or they localize an objective
and a handful of key results.
And that is a good point, that if we dothat, doesn't help us know how to make
decisions about what to stop doing.
Maria (14:54):
I mean it might be some teams where most or all the work that they do is
actually encompassing by that key result.
But I think that's the discussion thatneeds to happen to say, "Based on how
we contribute to these things, thisis the only one that we're actually
contributing towards." Then that's fine.
But it's the arbitrary that sayscompanies, meaning at the enterprise
(15:16):
level, or any team should only have one.
Sara (15:19):
All right.
I'm just gonna say something.
I'm gonna stop talking.
I'm not gonna explain it.
So my hot take is that, financial metricsbelong in mandatories and budgets.
They're KPIs, they aren't key results.
All right.
So Maria, if people wanna find you,how can they find and connect with you?
Maria (15:37):
Easiest way is to find me on LinkedIn, and my last
name is R-O-W-C-L-I-F-F-E.
Sara (15:46):
And Natalie, where can people find you?
Natalie (15:48):
Same as Maria.
LinkedIn's probably theeasiest way to reach me.
And yeah, I appreciate yougiving us that shout-out.
And congratulations again on your book.
So proud of you, my friend.
It's a killer book.
I love it.
And I love that people in yoursphere and outside of your sphere
are stepping up and saying, "Thisis great stuff." Congratulations.
Sara (16:10):
Thank you so much for everybody who tuned in.
You can find me at saralobkovich.comand youareastrategist.com for
information about the book, alsoavailable almost wherever you buy books.
We'll see you back here in Q3,if you've been here for the whole
recording, you know what the agenda is.
We will definitely take questions, though.
The questions are awesome, soget your questions into us and
(16:34):
we'll answer as many as we can.
And that's a wrap on our Q2 OKRupdate with the OKR Dream team.
I wanna thank Maria andNatalie for sharing their
experience and insights today.
As you can see, there's never ashortage of evolving thinking in the
OKR space, and I just feel so luckyto have incredibly talented folks like
(16:56):
this to chat with live here for you.
We're already planning our Q3 gatheringwhere we'll focus on goal achievement,
implementation, and execution.
Since Q3 is when we're really drivinghard for goal achievement before year end.
We're also gonna talk about howto make decisions about tooling
since we've all worked on both thetool and services side of OKRs.
(17:18):
If you have questions you'd like us toaddress in our next quarterly gathering
or sooner, please send them our way.
You can reach me athello@redcurrantco.com.
All three of us are on LinkedIn and I'llput all the information in the show notes.
We value your questions and wemight just answer some of them
before our next quarterly update
(17:39):
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?
My email addresses are too hard tospell, so visit findrc.co/contact
and shoot me a note that way.
(18:00):
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.
And if you know other Thinkydoers who'dbenefit from this episode, please share.
(18:20):
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.
Sara (00:53):
Welcome back for the second part of this Q2 2025 OKR update with
Maria Rowcliffe and Natalie Webb.
If you haven't listened to part one,go back and check that out first,
where we discuss an update to ourperspectives on generative AI and OKRs,
the evolution we're seeing in localizingand cascading practices, and how
(01:14):
different retrospective approaches candrive organizational and OKR learning.
In the second part, we're gonna diveinto some great questions from listeners
about rigid versus flexible OKRmodels, different timing approaches,
managing OKRs across differenttools and different teams, and we'll
even end with a few OKR hot takes.
(01:37):
Each of us brings a uniqueperspective based on our diverse
client experiences, so you get areally well-rounded view of what's
happening in the OKR world right now.
Let's jump back in.
One of the questions that camein was, are companies shifting
from rigid top-down or bottom-upmodels to something more blended?
(02:01):
For example, leadership sets theobjectives, teams shape the KRs.
What are you seeing in terms ofrigid execution of an OKR model
versus more flexible approaches?
Maria (02:12):
The clients I work with are doing more of that because
they're working with me.
They already have a process wherethey are doing the localization in the
way that they are, and it's working.
And nobody actually thinks it'soverly bureaucratic, and they get
the outcomes that they need from it.
I am not telling them to change, right?
If oftentimes the struggle is that they'renot getting the results that they want
(02:33):
to, people are beginning to say, “Whyare we doing this again?” Then that's
what I typically propose to them to try.
Sara (02:40):
How about you, Natalie?
Natalie (02:41):
Yeah, you know, some companies always have some weird old thing.
They have something that they wannaretire or sunset, and it's typically
some old waterfall... something weird.
So I'm seeing more of a blend.
And I see the teams thatare moving really fast.
They don't have lots of layersof objectives, but they almost
have like KRs and Sub-KRs.
I find those folks to be more trulyScrum-agile folks versus some of the
(03:05):
other stuff that's like sunsetting an oldsystem that doesn't have support anymore.
More traditional waterfall.
So I think there's always a blend for me.
And it's interesting that everybodyhas somewhere weird old thing
that they need to get rid of.
It's like, just unplug thatserver and see who calls, because
it's just a mess, you know?
But they're always trying to figureout how to sunset it or replace it, it
(03:26):
seems, or upgrade, like, I'm hearinga lot of SAP to HANA happening.
Oracle as well.
So yeah, it's a blend for me.
Sara (03:37):
I've always been a little bit different on this front.
That to me, "objectives" is aword and "key results" is a word,
and they fit into a strategicmodel with other words in them.
So the rigid approach to OKRs,I use a structured or scaffolded
approach in the first quarter.
Or if a team struggles to learn quicklyand adopt quickly, the first two quarters.
(04:03):
But then my mature state is atremendous amount of flexibility.
It's like, once we learn the wordsand leadership is modeling the words
and meanings, then the rigiditycan come out of the framework.
We just have shared language and behavior,and we know what those words mean and
we can use them where we need them.
I'm also in the same camp ofless localizing of objectives.
(04:26):
I find alignment to be more coherentwhen we do less objective localization.
I still use themes for each objective.
And so if the objective doesn't make senseto a local team, the theme usually does.
And if they wanna write anobjective for some reason, they can.
But yeah, I'm seeing thesame thing as an efficiency.
So the approaches that I use, yeah,we start out structured and scaffolded
(04:50):
just until we learn the words andmeanings, and then things can get much
more flexible in terms of approach.
This also leads into the next questionthat we got, which is, what are your
thoughts on different timing models?
Annual, quarterly, trimester, rolling,event-triggered, like for product
(05:11):
launches, acquisitions, leadershipchanges, etc. Natalie, what are you
seeing in terms of timing models?
Natalie (05:20):
Yeah, I'm seeing a variation.
when I'm working with a Scrum team.
They're incorporating their OKRcheck-ins every two weeks with
their Scrums, which is great.
But other teams that are not running Scrumsprints are doing more monthly updates,
weekly, biweekly, and then monthly.
So the timing is different, Ithink, depending on the team.
Maria (05:41):
So this might be one way we disagree a little bit.
Yeah.
So I actually wrote a post aboutthis because I am of the opinion
that if you have a KR that youonly manage monthly, you are not
managing it, you're tracking it.
Because you essentially have two datapoints, and then the quarter is over.
And yes, there still might be someenvironments or for some KRS where the
(06:02):
shift is so slow that monthly is okay.
I would argue that there'svery few of those, and I
can't really come up with one.
And so I think if you don'tlook at it at least twice a
week, you're not managing it.
You're tracking it.
Because things are changing so fastnow, and I think it's hard that if
you don't have a habit of actuallymanaging on a more ongoing basis,
(06:27):
it becomes not important, right?
That's why many of these monthlybusiness reviews ends up being just
not discussions around what gotin the way, what do we need to do,
because that might have happenedseveral weeks ago and we moved on.
And we are not gonna actually know ifwe did the right thing until next month.
So I really believe in thediscipline of doing it at least
(06:49):
biweekly, preferably weekly.
And it doesn't mean that it hasto be a heavy hand in terms of
spending hours and hours on it.
But somebody, and preferably the team, atany point is gonna be able to articulate,
how are we doing on this KR and why?
Doesn't mean that it has to behalf a day discussion of it.
But if the point is to actively manageoutcomes, the way I think about it is
(07:12):
reduce or eliminate surprises, right?
So that when at the end of the quarteryou don't say, "Is there something that
happened that we could have learnedabout earlier and then actually take
action on?" Then I think that it isthat the more recurring cycle is needed.
And again, if the things that you areactively trying to manage are slow
(07:33):
moving, then maybe monthly is enough.
But I don't know many thingsthat are like that anymore.
Natalie (07:38):
I can throw a couple out and see if you agree.
Um, legal, merger and acquisition,tax team, surveys, customer
surveys under customer set.
Some of that stuff doesn't move that fast.
Technology, i'm with you.
Bad news only gets worse with time.
So the earlier they can raisean issue, I think the better.
Maria (07:55):
I would argue though that if there's something that they don't have to
check in on every week or know how it isgoing, then they might have the wrong KRs.
Then there's actually KPIs more,that is, more health checks.
So KRs, in my mind, should be somethingthat you're actively looking to improve.
If it's just a health metric, thenabsolutely, once a month might be fine.
Sara (08:12):
The other thing I'm seeing too is I was one of the folks who was
advocating for longer OKR cycles, liketrimester as opposed to quarterly,
and now, totally reversed course.
Quarterly is even hard, for someclients right now with the volatility
in the operating environment.
And I am seeing clientsdeveloping less key results,
(08:34):
also because of the volatility.
So there's more development of mandatoriesor commits that have to be achieved.
And then I am seeing a little bit fewer.
But on that time horizon question, in theUS, different overseas, like it's so cool
to be working in the US and Australiabecause Australia's just humming along.
(08:56):
Like, We're doing whatwe always...” you know?
And then my messaging in the US rightnow is "strategy during chaos" and my
messaging in Australia is "go team."
Maria (09:04):
Yeah.
Sara (09:05):
That is something where I've changed, because I was working with
clients around that shift to trimesterly.
What I find with trimesterlyimplementations is we don't lose
Q4, where with the quarterlyimplementations, we tend to lose
Q4 because we're focused on Q1.
But the other reason I'm going back toquarterly is actually this leadership
team that I'm working on a biweekly basis.
(09:27):
So I facilitate their OKR review biweekly.
With most implementations, we havethose early adopters, and then
there might be people who don'tjust lag, they just perma-resist.
And what I'm seeing with this groupis that every two-week learning and
reinforcement is bringing everyone along.
(09:47):
Like, they're really makingbig progress on adoption.
So yeah, I've, that's the placewhere my thinking has changed.
I have a last question.
I'm gonna spring on you.
But let's do a lightning answer to ourlast viewer question, which was: With
tool sprawl, are orgs more likely to foldOKRs into what they're already using,
(10:12):
like Notion, Asana, Salesforce, insteadof managing separate OKR platforms?
What are you seeing, Natalie?
Natalie (10:20):
I'm seeing more Excel use than ever, actually.
And I think it's to get away from the ARRof the seat cost of some of the tools.
Sara (10:29):
How about you, Maria?
Maria (10:30):
Yes.
Because I do think that part of whatwe do when we talk to clients these
days, identify why you're doing this,and then figure out what the process is
gonna be, and then figure out what theway you're gonna be managing things.
Because if it's a tool-led thingand you start with the tool, and
then the process isn't there, wedon't advise clients to do that.
Doesn't mean that we won't, at the endof the day, suggest that they might
(10:51):
get one, but that's not where to start.
And so I'm definitely seeingthe more scrappy as well.
And Excel is probably theone that I see the most also.
Natalie (11:03):
Yeah.
Sara (11:03):
I am also seeing, it's similar for me.
Because so much of the mathhappens at L1 and L2, that can be
managed without specialty software.
Where I am still seeing specialtysoftware adoption is in organizations
that don't have an existing,kind of coherent, approach to
(11:27):
program and project management.
So that is somewhere where the tools help,because then we don't have that dueling
OKR platform and project managementkind of conflict that we run into.
If they've got a really establishedprogram and project management
mechanism, then I just remindclients, don't let the project and
program management eat the OKRs.
(11:49):
Like you have to really definethe behaviors and what we're
doing so that we don't wind upwith just project management.
Natalie (11:58):
It's like teams are using what works for them.
Maria (12:01):
Yeah.
I would argue that the tools, thatthe project management tools out
there that have added on OKRs, tendto also have examples of OKRs that are
project deliverables and milestones.
Because that's theirbread and butter, right?
And so I typically say (12:15):
use stuff for project management, because they're great.
But these are not what you actuallywanna be managing, because you're
already managing those here.
So why would you convert that and callkey results when you already have a
process and a tool for doing that?
Sara (12:31):
Okay, so let's do another, I'm gonna add something else to our
Q3 agenda, and let's talk about howto make the decision on tooling.
So we're not gonna talk about specifictools, but let's talk about, like, how
you advise clients about tooling, andwhat we've, because we've all worked
on the tool side, and we've workedon the services side, so I think that
(12:52):
would be really helpful for folks.
I'm gonna ask one last question of you.
And it's okay to take a minute tothink about it, because I didn't have
this one in our plan, but then I waslike, oh, this is cool to talk about.
So, what is the most controversial thingyou can think of in your OKR practice?
(13:13):
What are you doing or saying thatyou think other people would be
like, "Oh my gosh, that's nuts"?
Natalie (13:17):
I have one.
I've had a few leaders want me to useOKRs as Big Brother to spy on their
teams, and that's just so shady.
I really don't like that.
It was never meant to be that way.
And so that's one thingI really push back on.
It's like, if you need to furtherexamine a team and how they're
performing, I say lean in and dothat internally, and don't use OKRs
as a guise to a Big Brother, a team.
(13:41):
That's the one I'm like, yuck.
Maria (13:42):
One thing that I object very much to, and I know that this is,
there's a lot of people that advocatefor teams only setting one or two OKRs.
You should just have one.
There should be one strategic priority.
And I am so against that.
And I think back to your point,Natalie, then you're gonna have this
one KR that just hangs out there,and then all these other things
that people are spending time on.
And so the ability to useyour OKR to understand what
(14:05):
to say no to is non-existent.
So the whole idea about making workpurposeful has essentially gone away.
And so that is one thing that I havea few pet peeves that I'm like, “Don't
do that.” And I think there's a lot ofpeople out there advocating for, “You
should only have one strategic priority.
One OKR per quarter, or two.” That, tome that arbitrarily, I absolutely am for
(14:27):
having focus, but arbitrarily setting oneis just, yeah, I'm very much against it.
Sara (14:36):
That's good food for thought for me.
I don't recommend setting one, butI do sometimes have teams that only
create one objective and some keyresults, or they localize an objective
and a handful of key results.
And that is a good point, that if we dothat, doesn't help us know how to make
decisions about what to stop doing.
Maria (14:54):
I mean it might be some teams where most or all the work that they do is
actually encompassing by that key result.
But I think that's the discussion thatneeds to happen to say, "Based on how
we contribute to these things, thisis the only one that we're actually
contributing towards." Then that's fine.
But it's the arbitrary that sayscompanies, meaning at the enterprise
(15:16):
level, or any team should only have one.
Sara (15:19):
All right.
I'm just gonna say something.
I'm gonna stop talking.
I'm not gonna explain it.
So my hot take is that, financial metricsbelong in mandatories and budgets.
They're KPIs, they aren't key results.
All right.
So Maria, if people wanna find you,how can they find and connect with you?
Maria (15:37):
Easiest way is to find me on LinkedIn, and my last
name is R-O-W-C-L-I-F-F-E.
Sara (15:46):
And Natalie, where can people find you?
Natalie (15:48):
Same as Maria.
LinkedIn's probably theeasiest way to reach me.
And yeah, I appreciate yougiving us that shout-out.
And congratulations again on your book.
So proud of you, my friend.
It's a killer book.
I love it.
And I love that people in yoursphere and outside of your sphere
are stepping up and saying, "Thisis great stuff." Congratulations.
Sara (16:10):
Thank you so much for everybody who tuned in.
You can find me at saralobkovich.comand youareastrategist.com for
information about the book, alsoavailable almost wherever you buy books.
We'll see you back here in Q3,if you've been here for the whole
recording, you know what the agenda is.
We will definitely take questions, though.
The questions are awesome, soget your questions into us and
(16:34):
we'll answer as many as we can.
And that's a wrap on our Q2 OKRupdate with the OKR Dream team.
I wanna thank Maria andNatalie for sharing their
experience and insights today.
As you can see, there's never ashortage of evolving thinking in the
OKR space, and I just feel so luckyto have incredibly talented folks like
(16:56):
this to chat with live here for you.
We're already planning our Q3 gatheringwhere we'll focus on goal achievement,
implementation, and execution.
Since Q3 is when we're really drivinghard for goal achievement before year end.
We're also gonna talk about howto make decisions about tooling
since we've all worked on both thetool and services side of OKRs.
(17:18):
If you have questions you'd like us toaddress in our next quarterly gathering
or sooner, please send them our way.
You can reach me athello@redcurrantco.com.
All three of us are on LinkedIn and I'llput all the information in the show notes.
We value your questions and wemight just answer some of them
before our next quarterly update
(17:39):
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?
My email addresses are too hard tospell, so visit findrc.co/contact
and shoot me a note that way.
(18:00):
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.
And if you know other Thinkydoers who'dbenefit from this episode, please share.
(18:20):
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