This offers clear advantages over goals that are easy or easier. They have been shown to offer little in the way of value.
Frameworks like BSC, SMART and KPIs offer no clear guidance on how to set goal targets and define success. So when OKRs came along and offered very clear guidance on how targets should be set and success measured, you suddenly had science-backed goal setting best-practices baked in.
The score or grade of your Objective comes from the difficulty of your Key Results by way of a simple average across all of the Key Results. When planning your OKRs, one way of viewing the average score is your level of ambition.
Objective – Average Grade – 0.56
When you’re grading your achievement at the end of your planning period, your score is a measure of your achievement relative to that ambition. This is why calibrating what success looks like is so important and 100% is unlikely to be the answer. This is unlike the type of goals most people have set before as KPIs and SMART both don’t have this concept as a central pillar.
If you get to the end of a quarter and you’ve got a 95% score one concern might be that you’re not being ambitious enough. Google as an example would see the right balance of ambition and success being a final grade of 0.6 to 0.7 or 60% to 70%. And of course scoring lower might mean that your teams are not achieving enough. It’s a fine balancing act that again highlights the importance of good planning conversations.
ZOKRI allows you to grade your OKRs using BAU, Hard and Moon Shots, and like Google even apply weights to individual Key Results.