What if Your OKRs Are Wrong?
Jeff Gothelf
Teaching executives to simplify prioritization and decision-making by putting the customer first.
You’ve identified a problem to solve. You’ve collaborated with your team and stakeholders to come up with a set of well-written objective and key result statements as your goals. You set off to run your early product discovery efforts. Within the first couple of sprints you start to get a sense that something’s not right. The experiments are working. The customers are providing useful, valuable feedback. The solution hypotheses you came up with are solid and yet, customer behavior isn’t moving in the right direction. What could it be??
It turns out your OKRs were wrong.?
OKRS ARE ASSUMPTIONS
Every decision you make on what goals to pursue is based on the best information you have at the moment. It’s a guess. Or if that word sounds too unprofessional, it’s an assumption. You’re assuming certain customer behavior changes will happen if you build and design the right set of features. As much as your solution hypotheses can be wrong, sometimes it’s the goals that we’re targeting that are wrong because they, too, are assumptions.?
We make a series of assumptions about what we believe a “meaningful positive change” to customer behavior will look like and the impact it will have on our business. We expect our users to behave predictably. And, perhaps more often than we’d like to admit, we’re wrong.?
领英推荐
THIS IS A FEATURE OF OKRS, NOT A BUG
One of the main implementation steps of objectives and key results is more frequent and transparent check-ins. While the quarterly check-in is the bare minimum, teams should touch base with their stakeholders informally on a more regular basis. These informal meetings are the perfect venue for conversations like, “We keep trying different feature ideas but our users seem intent on the old way of working.” Or, “No matter what we suggest to customers it seems they don’t want to increase their usage of the service much more than what they’re currently doing.”?
Stakeholders can step in here and offer suggestions, direction and perhaps insight from their broader perspective about ways the team could keep trying to hit their key results. In the same way we’re not married to a set of features, we’re also not indefinitely committed to our OKRs. The evidence we collect each sprint helps to build a case for maintaining our goals or changing them. If the evidence overwhelmingly challenges the validity of either our objective, our key results or both then they must change. This, like killing or pivoting our solution hypotheses, is the organizational agility OKRs enable. In changing course we reduce the amount of effort sunk into the wrong effort and start to pivot towards potentially more accurate goals and successful product development efforts.?
HAVING THE TOUGH CONVERSATION?
Approaching your stakeholders with a request to change your goals can be a daunting task, if not a terrifying conversation for some teams. To maximize the chances of success, approach the conversation in the following ways:
By showing up prepared with evidence, data and strong opinions you can make a strong case for shifting your team’s goals. You also demonstrate the power of agility, managing to outcomes and evidence-based decisions.?
Karllestone Capital/Business Model & Design Thinking /Strategy/Fintech/Growth/SPC Business Agility Coach/Change&Transformation/Adjunct Prof.Keio Univ. Entrepreneurship & Startup/ New York Univ. Marketing & New Ventures
1 年Then you are not using GQM .. Goal Question Metrics
Helping SMBs Build Structure and Efficiency for Sustainable and Scalable Success
3 年It is a cycle, that must be continuously reviewed (quarterly, annually). Thanks for the article.
High-performing & sustainable websites for impact businesses | Sustainable Web Designer | Speaker
3 年Thanks for the insights in the article! While I agree with what you write and especially the assumption nature of OKRs, I wonder if it's not a good idea to focus on a good understanding of the problem space and thus make reasonably sure that your assumption about the right problem to solve is correct. I can see that especially in startup environments that's not always possible, but for mature products I would want to make sure that I have enough insights to select the right problem, so that at least my Objective won't change and I can commit to it. And if the Key Results are selected well to measure independent of the solutions chosen, you might decrease chances of having to change OKRs mid-term. So while the way to reach a goal can and should change based on emerging insights, I believe a change in the goal itself is rather a sign for a less than optimal goal selection. In that sense, I would also not equate commitment to goals with commitment to features, but rather follow Jeff Bezo's advice of "being stubborn on vision, but flexible on the details" with respect to goals instead of vision. Having said that, sometimes stuff happens... and then it's great to have your advice for regular check-ins and stakeholder communication!
Risk and Compliance Transformation and Strategy at BNY Business Transformation, Strategic Planning, Change Management, People Development. ex-Vanguard, ex-Fidelity
3 年Well said, Jeff Gothelf
Improving delivery & results
3 年Good example of double loop learning. Not getting right results? Maybe it’s not the wrong solution but the wrong problem or goal.