Management Articles

Cheat Sheet / Updated 05-07-2024

Now more than ever, inclusive leadership must become the new normal. Inclusion is the degree to which an employee perceives that they’re a valued member of the work group and encouraged to fully participate in the organization. That means that an inclusive leader demonstrates the skills and creates the kind of work environment where all talent can thrive because they feel valued, respected, that they belong, and are set up for success. As such, this means that leaders must shift their mindsets and adopt new skillsets in order to meet the demands of the global changing marketplace, workplace, and the communities in which they do business. It also means embracing inclusion as a leadership responsibility and a performance expectation that is as common as managing projects and serving customers. Becoming an inclusive leader isn’t as easy as it sounds. Inclusive leadership is much more than having a title, giving a hug, and being nice. It requires a paradigm shift, an openness to different ways of doing things, leaning into some discomfort, and demonstrating courage to embrace the unfamiliar. This Cheat Sheet provides food for thought, best practices, and strategies, as well as guidance on how to become a more inclusive leader and how to drive it inside the organization.

Article / Updated 10-20-2023

To stay competitive, companies have to adapt and adopt a progressive feedback structure. The ones leading the pack are those whose leaders recognize that their talent development strategies need to evolve with the changing demographics of their workforce. Successful feedback and reviews are absolutely critical. Oftentimes an employee’s exit can be traced back to a poor review session with his manager. If you’re not rethinking your review session to appeal to Millennials’ unique needs, you’re going to slowly (or quickly) see your turnover numbers creep up. When Baby Boomers entered the workforce, they entered into stiff competition with millions of peers to try and get ahead. In order to better understand how they stacked up with others, Boomers collectively created the annual feedback process. At the time, this yearly review was considered revolutionary. Fast forward 20 years and you had Gen Xers growing weary of the style and infrequency of the yearly evaluation. It felt too formal, too delayed and, in a way, insincere. Xers had different objectives and priorities from their Boomer predecessors. The old model wasn’t working for them, so they shook things up by asking for more regular and transparent feedback. Enter Millennials. They’re the first generation in the workforce that grew up with the Internet. It has shaped who they are and what they expect, and they’re bringing those new expectations into the working world. Don’t be afraid to examine your current review structure and ask questions, such as: Your review policy should be a living, breathing, evolving thing — has it been touched in the last ten years? Five years? Past year? Do your managers give both formal and informal feedback? Is there flexibility in feedback frequency, or is the rate static? Do you customize your approach based on the generation and/or the individual’s preference? Are you staying abreast of what your competitors, as well as the best-of-the-best, are doing? If you answer “no” to any of these questions, read on. If you make a 180-degree shift in the way things used to be done, you’re going to face an unhappy flood of Xer and Boomer employees. Make sure you’re giving people a few options. Maybe your Xers don’t want a weekly check-in and once a month serves them just fine. Don’t ever assume; take the time to ask. And always keep in mind that change is hard, and in the workplace, if you’re trying to retain all generations, evolution trumps revolution. Know what works for Millennials When strategizing about how to deliver feedback to Millennials, don’t spend sleepless nights daunted by how much you need to change. Yes, Millennials are wired a bit differently, but at the end of the day, they’re just people. To make things easier for you and more valuable for them, it’s helpful to get a handle on understanding what works for them. Chances are you’ve got a pretty good grasp of how to communicate with Baby Boomer and Gen X employees, but start thinking (or asking!) about what works for Millennials before you sit down for a review. Ask them to self-evaluate before they pontificate One of the first steps to make a review session work for Millennials is to give them time to think and evaluate first. This practice is not uncommon to Millennials — they’ve likely been doing it from elementary school all the way through their MBA programs — but that doesn’t mean they do it without prompting. Sitting down and listing all the things you’ve done right and wrong isn’t necessarily a fun task for any generation, but it certainly is worthwhile. Prior to an informal or formal review session, ask Millennials to reflect on their performance. Ask yourself whether you know what to say While it may seem obvious, do your best to think before you speak. Consider phrases/words/thoughts commonly used in the workplace that should be avoided and replace them with something more savory. Don’t Say Do Say Three months ago … Last week or a couple of hours ago … Why do you need so much feedback? How much feedback do you prefer? What could you have done differently? What did you do well and what would you change? Back in my day … What has worked for me may or may not work for you … Let’s talk about your weaknesses … Let’s focus on your strengths … Ask them Yup. That is it. Just plain ask them how they like their feedback. In all likelihood they have lots of thoughts on the topic. But you can’t forget that, though they belong to the Millennial generation, each employee is an individual. Take the time to have a conversation with them about how they prefer to receive feedback. Come to the meeting prepared with a proposed review session and format. Ask them for their thoughts, amend as necessary, and go from there. If you’re feeling adventurous, ask them whether they need anything different from you as a mentor. How to differentiate between formal and informal feedback Feedback sessions lie on a moving scale of formality, where all levels are equally important, but knowing when and how to go about each one … well, that requires a dash of experience with a pinch of emotional intelligence. That said, Millennials show a marked preference for the informal end of that scale. They’re an inherently informal generation because they grew up in an environment that allowed for constant and candid communication. Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram all allow Millennials to give feedback on people’s lives with a thumbs up/heart icon/emoji or comment. An acquaintance might post a recent picture of a vacation in Spain, and the response might be “Whoa, Jordan, those bullfighters are impressive. Looks fun!” Even if they’ve spoken to Jordan only a handful of times, they’re comfortable commenting (in a way, giving him feedback). They’re so accustomed to constantly giving and delivering feedback via these informal platforms that, to a Millennial, informal is the new normal, to the point that very formal feedback can stir up anxiety and feel a bit uncomfortable. In stark contrast, other generations grew up in an environment when the norm was being left alone to fend for yourself unless something was going terribly wrong. In the workplace, older employees wait for the formal review process and use it as a scale to track progress over time. In this format, you condense a half year or year’s worth of comments into a couple-hour time block. The window for feedback is typically opened for that brief period of time before being shut again for all but the most immediate and/or pressing needs. Politically correct language and documentation are standard, as well as professional attire and thorough preparation for every single review session. There’s clearly quite a difference between the formal standard that Xers and Boomers are accustomed to and the more informal check-in that Millennials hunger for. In all likelihood, all your employees — whether they’re 25 or 68 — prefer a healthy mix of the two (with Millennials tipping the balance in favor of the informal). To make sure that you deliver, you must first understand what differentiates the formal from the informal. Formal feedback looks like this: The review is often scheduled months in advance. Pre-work is a prerequisite. The review room is organized in a specific way (for example, the manager deliberately sits across from the employee). The review always takes place in person. It lasts for a set period of time, typically one to two hours. Criticism is carefully couched, using phrases like, “This is an area of opportunity.” Professionalism and polish in communication and dress are expected. The review is meticulously documented. Communication is (mostly) one-directional. Extended periods of time lapse between sessions. Informal feedback, on the other hand, looks more like this: Feedback is delivered instantly or within a couple hours or days. Little or no pre-work is required. A public place or open office is often preferable to a closed-door office. Virtual communication is an acceptable alternative to meeting in person. Time frames are short and flexible, typically 5–15 minutes. The style of communication is casual and open — direct, but not abrasive. There are no expectations regarding decorum or dress. Documentation is scant, aside from determining next steps. Communication is two-directional. Flexibility is key in finding time that works, which may often be determined on the fly. Each individual may prefer feedback that is particular to his career and lifestyle, so what works for one person won’t necessarily work for another. It will take a bit more work upfront, but make sure to curate your approach based on the needs of the individual. Determine the right frequency for performance reviews It’s no secret that Millennials want constant feedback. Of course, they do — they’ve grown up in an instant world and know that the sooner they learn something needs fixing, the sooner they’ll be able to fix it. The work environment, however, isn’t necessarily designed to accommodate that model, at least not at the present. HR policies, overscheduling, and lack of resources can all get in the way of instant communication and evaluation. As a manager, you work with the tools at your disposal. Keep the lines of communication open with both your higher-ups and your direct reports. To ensure that you’re determining the right frequency — one that works for you, your employee, and your organization — follow these three steps: Ask. Get a gauge of how often the Millennials you’re managing want your thoughts. You will find that it varies from person to person, and you’ll save valuable time that might be lost in making assumptions. Research. Seek insight from fellow leaders about what works for them. How often do they meet with their teams, and how rigid or flexible is that schedule? You can even take it a step further and track what trends and best-in-class examples are being referenced in the news and apply those concepts to your own practice. Act. After asking and researching, set a plan into action. Pilot a feedback timeline for a month and then review until you find what works. The following are signs that the frequency may be too high: When you meet with your direct report, you have trouble coming up with a review topic, whether the feedback is good or bad. You spend all the review session talking about your personal lives. Your own work is suffering. The Millennial keeps cancelling your sessions. There’s not enough time between your conversations to see positive changes in performance. You’re bored. They’re bored. At most, stick with a default frequency of once a week. Younger generations will favor informal feedback in the moment, but in many cases that just may not be practical. Instead, as a base, schedule one-on-ones regularly for 15–30 minutes. Set a time and a location, and make it a habit. That way you and your reports will grow accustomed to these check-ins. It’s up to both of you to assess and readjust the necessary frequency from there.

Article / Updated 10-20-2023

Having insight into your audience’s wants and desires will help you comprehend the factors that lead to their perceptions of authority, leadership, values, virtues, and work ethics. These are mobilizing factors. Here, you gain that insight by breaking down the workforce into the beautiful Quad — the four generations currently operating in the workforce today. During adolescence, people make determinations about what is cool, healthy, natural, and worth their time; sexuality emerges, and passion and ambition start to pique their interest. Opinions based on outside influences create the framework to ultimately determine what they want. The formative years also play a large part in determining how people will view the world. Their perceptions and reactions to different stimuli, such as how their parents raised them, current events, music, politics, and so on, create opportunities to draw conclusions on safety, security, money, career, government, and so on. These outside factors create their mindset and way of being in the world. Although no two people will react the same, general conclusions about generations can be derived. Listen with an open mind. Don’t judge. Be aware of what may be your own preconceived notions of who and what each generation in the Quad represents. Generational cohorts are defined by a period of development within a certain span of time. To some extent, these boundaries are arbitrary, and defining and labeling generations can vary from sociologist to sociologist, though for the most part they vary by only a few years. The author uses the research of noted sociologists William Strauss and Neil Howe to bracket the generational periods. Feel free to adjust the years based on your understanding if needed. In the figure below, you may be surprised to be classified not as a Baby Boomer, but on the outer edge of Generation X. Or you may be more Millennial than you knew. There are three main generations that make up the current workforce: Baby Boomers, Generation X, and Millennials. On the outskirts are the almost completely retired Silent generation and the emerging Homeland generation. Together, they make up the “bumper” generations of the current workforce and are classified as the fourth part of the Quad. Just so you know, the Quad has mixed feelings about you, the leader, and what you can or can’t do. They wonder about your ethics, trustworthiness, and commitment. Are you surprised? You may chalk it up as normal, and it is. But you should know why they may mistrust you. Emotional intelligence, sensitivity, and reflective moments will be a staple on our journey together. Everyone has life experiences that help create perceptions of how things should or will be. Each cohort has reason to be skeptical and critical of leaders in general. Events and experiences may have caused them to mistrust authority and leadership. These events fostered the seeds of mistrust. Workers of all ages have become exasperated by leaders who lack authenticity, compassion, and transparency. Will their leaders do what they say they’ll do when they say they’ll do it? Tell them the truth and take responsibility. For example, in 2015 Japan’s Takata Corporation recalled their airbags and set out to repairs tens of millions of products placed in Honda motor vehicles. However, it wasn’t without pressure from U.S. regulators that set this remedy in motion. Takata leadership took responsibility for the issue and ultimately made it right. The Quad is a reflection of our society — fatigued by empty promises, unaligned values, and the inability to trust authority. They want more. The good news is that they are willing to give more. You can’t change history or their life experiences, but there are some things you can do to change their experience right now. That starts with you, not them. Welcome to values-based leadership.

Article / Updated 10-20-2023

If you’ve ever struggled giving a Millennial feedback, you’re not alone. It’s hard. There is no one way to do it, and it doesn’t always get easier with the more people you’ve led or managed; however, one thing is true. Whatever you’re feeling, you’re not alone. Others have felt your pain, your strife, and your desire to be better. A Millennial is just as much of an employee as someone from any other generation though, so there’s no getting around this. Here’s a brief guide on how to navigate the ins and outs of feedback with Millennials. The delivery of tough feedback No matter the generation, level, or age, delivering tough feedback is rarely a fun process. It can lead to a defensive attitude, a reluctance to change, or even a desire to leave. But everyone deserves the opportunity to identify and improve on sore spots, and you’re entitled to the opportunity to improve your team and fix problem areas. The way Xers prefer to receive difficult feedback (they most likely want you to rip off the Band-Aid as quickly as possible) doesn’t necessarily work best for Millennials. The challenge When you deliver tough feedback to Millennials, you worry that they’re worrying. You may be nervous that they’re starting to think too hard about what they need to do differently. Chances are that what you thought was a helpful conversation became one of their worst work moments ever. Possible cause Millennials were raised in the self-esteem movement and weren’t given the tools for handling criticism at a young age. While other generations learned how to let it roll off their backs or deal with it and move on, younger generations internalize the feedback, all while merging their personal lives with their professional lives. The remedy If they’re internalizing your feedback, it typically means they care … a lot. They likely view you as someone whom they want to impress. Maybe they view you as their confidant and coach. It may not seem like it in the moment, but this is actually good, so here’s how you can move past the discomfort: Get comfortable knowing that the situation may get tense or awkward. Don’t waste time getting to the tough feedback. Deliver your critiques in an appropriate time frame, the sooner the better. Provide a structured road map to improve. Follow up with next steps. Be a voice of encouragement along the way. What to do if a Millennial cries It’s most managers’ and leaders’ worst nightmare — what happens if a Millennial starts blubbering, you panic, and you don’t have tissues to provide for them? Okay, not all Millennials cry, that’s an exaggerated depiction of what truly transpires. But it’s more likely to happen with this generation, especially in their earlier years at work. You better start prepping now if you haven’t already. The challenge Millennials can sometimes internalize evaluations and react defensively or sensitively, occasionally resulting in watery eyes, drops of tears, or a minor breakdown. This outcome can prevent a productive review session if what you intended as helpful words of change were instead heard as scathing criticism. Possible cause Millennials grew up in an environment that asked them to be vulnerable and open with their feelings, whereas other generations learned early on how to control their emotions and keep their poker faces intact. Additionally, Millennials may be taking feedback personally, not just professionally, and a comment about their work may be heard as a comment about them as a person. The remedy Although the tears may be distracting, confusing, and even a bit frustrating, you can take these simple steps if a Millennial is crying: Don’t automatically get frustrated. Don’t draw too much attention to the tears. Continue with your thought. Ask if there’s anything the Millennial wants to say. Welcome the option to talk later. Don’t respond with pity or condescension. What if Mom and Dad get involved? Millennials have a close bond with their parents and view them as trusted allies and quite possibly even friends. Sometimes this relationship can go a bit too far if the doting parents become meddlesome in the work environment. It started when Millennials were young, and it’s very different than the way their parents were raised. Millennials are growing up and becoming more independent from their parents — especially older Millennials who have been in the workforce for well over a decade. Luckily, that means fewer calls from Mom and Dad. But when it comes to younger Millennials and even the generation after them, their folks may still be around for support — much to the chagrin of managers. The challenge Millennials’ parents may overstep and contact a work environment to discuss a feedback session gone wrong, amongst many other things. It comes across as unprofessional, annoying, and inappropriate. Possible cause In many cases, your Millennial employees may not know that their parents are calling. They likely discussed the situation with their parents, asked for advice, and may be seeking a solution, but the parents took it upon themselves to help solve the problem for them. Your Millennial employee likely didn’t set his parents on you like a pack of Rottweilers. The remedy Consider some damage control and prevention before griping about meddlesome Boomer parents. Thank the parents for their interest, but let them know you need to speak directly to their Millennial child regarding anything work-related. Ask the Millennial about the incident. Explain to the Millennial why his parents’ involvement can actually be hurtful, not helpful, to his career. Confront it and move on. Don’t hold the incident against the Millennial or use it as a reason to think poorly about him. Use the close parent-child relationship in a positive way to boost your company’s employer status. Consider creating an environment that welcomes parents to the office in a “bring your parents to work” day. This can be a great marketing strategy. I think my Millennial is about to quit … If Millennials leave an organization, it can likely be traced to the last time that they received feedback. You don’t want that last review session to be the ultimate reason that a Millennial decided to leave the organization. The challenge A Millennial receives a firm review, and rather than planning how to change her behaviors or work, she starts plotting her exit to find a workplace she feels will be more conducive to her growth and career improvement (or hurt her feelings less). Possible cause If Millennials receive critical feedback without a clear structure of how to improve, they’ll feel deflated instead of motivated. If weaknesses are focused on more than strengths, Millennials may be wondering whether they do anything right. What are my contributions? Why am I even here? While other generations wouldn’t have dreamed about leaving their job without finding another one, Millennials believe that it’s worth it if they don’t have to sacrifice more of their life in a job that makes them unhappy. The remedy Move quickly and swiftly if you want your Millennial to stay: Schedule an informal meeting. Have an honest check-in and provide the option of a follow-up check-in. Give the Millennial the opportunity to give you feedback. Ask whether a clear structure is in place for the Millennial’s growth and improvement (if not, put one into action). If things aren’t going well for you or the Millennial, consider that it may be time for the Millennial to leave.

Article / Updated 10-19-2023

Values-based leadership (VBL) continues the evolution of how we choose to engage in business. It’s the next step in the integration of one of the initial Conscious Capitalism principles: Business is good, noble, and heroic because it provides ethical opportunities for everyone. VBL expands on Conscious Capitalism using a specific, yet customizable, set of values as the platform for norms of doing business with others and internally. Each step in this leadership model leads to an organization that performs at maximum capacity. Within each of the five sectors, specific tasks, actions, and behaviors need to be instituted. This is the starting point of your journey. Here is an overview of what each sector means: Values-Based Principles: There is a difference between what’s implied and what’s expected. Clarity on which principles are selected by each leader for themselves and their organizations is the foundation for the process. Character of Leadership: You’ll hear me say many times that character can’t be faked. It can be evolved and directed in more constructive ways, but it’s not something you can fake, not for long. It is who you are. On our journey, I’ll show you how, where, and why you need to expand on who you are to become the leader others really need and want right now. Building an Environment of Trust: This is the part of your company culture that’s crucial — without it, you’ll fail. Trust in the leadership, one another, and the path you’re all on together will determine how productive your teams will be. Simply put, if they don’t trust you, they most certainly won’t follow you, at least not wholeheartedly. Employees Engaged: Either they’re part of the process and the organization’s success, or they aren’t. Your willingness to invest in them will speak volumes to them. That investment comes in a variety of applications, such as training, development, benefits, perks, and simply making them part of the process. Performing at Maximum Capacity: The first four elements bring us to this point. Let’s reverse the thought process. Engaged employees who are actively involved in the company’s success are working from a place of trust. They are all in. This was achieved because the leader has led by example with clarity, consistency, and empathy. People love working with people who they truly believe have their best interests at heart, and not just the bottom line. So, are you in? Your reaction to the top-level view will tell you a lot about your own capacity to evolve, change, grow, and adapt. What’s your willingness level at this point? Rank it from one to five. One means “I’m really not interested at all.” Three means, “You’ve got my attention but I’m not sure,” and five means, “I’m all in.”

Article / Updated 10-19-2023

Sometimes staying the course and holding steady are great. But at some point, everyone must upgrade their systems, thinking, and ways of being to continue to be viable. There’s a concept in nature called bifurcation. Bifurcation is a process that nature takes to renew itself. Usually it involves a disruption or inflammation that precipitates a split, a morphing into two. For example, deep forests are prone to fires. Within the forest are types of trees, spores, and other flora that require excessive heat for them to reproduce. With fire, they grow and multiply. Without it, they rot and die. One branch of possibility becomes life-affirming as a result of the disruption, and the other (without the disruption) could lead to the species becoming extinct. When you apply bifurcation to business, you see that normal disruptions happen, and as a result — for example, the market crash in 2008 or massive corruption scandals — the system is forced to make a choice: review, reflect, and enact change, or do nothing at all, as illustrated in the figure below. Doing nothing often results in the company petering out into extinction. Many companies and their leadership have taken this route. Not all disruptions or course corrections are a result of such large issues. Consider the following as potential signs that a change is needed in the leadership approach: Excessive competition: While competition will occur, overly aggressive and destructive or disruptive behavior will crumble teams. The attributes and principles of values-based leadership become the remedy. Exclusions and exceptions: Creating an environment where only some people need to follow the rules disrupts the level playing field of fairness where everyone has access to opportunities. Excessive gossip and rumors: These are key indicators that there is a lack of communication and lack of trust seeping into the organization. Team failure: Teams fail to work together to reach their goals. Us versus them: When teams, managers, and leaders are pitted against one another, progress is inhibited. Employee turnover: High levels of turnover create gaps in wisdom and continuity in the organization. The decline of trust and motivation: These elements create the foundation where people work together for the greater good of all involved. Lack of ownership: Leaders and employees who aren’t tapped into the vision, mission, or purpose for the organization’s work create apathy. Stagnation: Lack of innovation in processes, problem solving, products, services, production, sourcing, and technology causes a great deal of frustration for employees. When the decision is made that something must change, which is where you may be in this moment, the next step is to conduct a review to determine how to course correct and then roll out adaptive action and rewrite the future. You may be on a course that’s not sustainable. People may begin walking away from the company, or apathy may continue to weigh down progress. In your heart, you’re probably thinking, I just need to give this one more shot before I walk away. Or: This place has massive potential, but things have to change. What’s scary is when leaders either refuse to see they have a problem or don’t care enough to make any changes. That, inevitably, leads to extinction — dismissal of leadership and potentially the failure of the company. You make the choice to grow, change, and adapt and create a brighter future — or not. To make this choice, you need to be a leader who is open-minded, ruthlessly self-aware, and willing to look at the truth of your results. You also need to be savvy enough to understand that the world of business is changing. Will you keep up or be left behind? Although remnants of the old, establishment way of operating linger on, a more progressive view of business has taken hold. Already, leaders of today are required to deploy a more comprehensive set of tools that go well beyond a technical skill set and a lofty education. Empathy and awareness are being added to leaders’ skill sets. So-called “soft skills” are no longer considered intangibles. They’re a big component of why people will want to work for you and with you, and why they’ll aspire to follow the leadership image you provide for them. The use of self-reflection is important to gain insight into yourself and your motivations. You must consider what it will mean for you to operate in a “we” rather than “me” environment. Reframing how to view business differently sets the foundation for your journey: Is what I’m doing about me — or about them? Who is this serving — me or them? Am I setting up a culture that evolves around me — or around us? You have to assess the selflessness of your leadership. You’ll need to make decisions that affect the whole. Knowing which course to take may become murky but be sure that you’re thinking of the whole — the we — of the organization. When it gets into me territory, you’re in trouble. Everyone has a survival mechanism that’s designed to look out for number one — to protect yourself. But when it comes to your leadership role, we must always be part of the equation.

Article / Updated 08-16-2023

Before I get into the value of setting objectives and key results (OKRs), I should probably answer a question many readers might be asking: What are OKRs? Basically, OKRs is a method of setting goals for an organization. Humans are avid goal setters, constantly striving to improve our performance, regardless of the field or endeavor we choose. Perhaps you have experience in setting goals in some of these domains: Family: Partner, children, extended relations Physical: Health, fitness, and wellbeing Work: Career, volunteering Spiritual: Religious or other spiritual affiliations Relationships: With friends or others Hobbies: Interests beyond work Some of my goal-setting memories bring me a few chuckles, such as my goal of winning a “Best Screenplay” Academy Award after taking one screenwriting class. I even pictured Steven Spielberg having the honor of bestowing the Oscar on me. Hey, the more specific a goal the better, right? Your company probably has goals related to sales, customer satisfaction, retaining the best people, and a host of other elements designed to propel you past your competition. Whether people have their companies or themselves in mind, there is little doubt that setting goals is a very healthy and positive activity, one that everyone should pursue with rigor. Goal-setting challenges Problems often occur in how people go about writing and constructing goals. That’s where many people, whether crafting goals for companies or themselves, get stopped in their tracks almost instantly. It’s common, for instance, to write goals that are vague and nebulous: “Get more fit.” “Be the best company in our industry.” They sound good — and few would argue with the merits of either of those examples — but the quality that specifically marks real success is missing from both. A number of other pitfalls loom out there in the goal world as well, such as: Setting unrealistic goals that you have no genuine chance to achieve Having too many goals at one time Failing to account for any assistance you’ll require from others in achieving your goals Despite the potential challenges, goal setting is one of the most powerful things you can do in your organization (and your life). You just need a better, more reliable system, and that’s where OKRs — objectives and key results— come in. Sounds good, huh? Maybe if I’d have known about OKRs back when I was practicing that Oscar speech, I’d actually be clutching a gold statue now. The good news for me and you is that it’s never too late to succeed. Setting goals really works Maybe you’re already convinced and are a believer in the power of setting ambitious goals, with a lifetime of experience to back up that claim. If so, great — we have that in common. On the other hand, perhaps you do need to be convinced of goal setting’s value. Maybe you came up in the school of hard knocks and don’t believe in the woo-woo world of setting goals. Well, I’ve got news for you: Goal setting, especially with the use of OKRs, really works, and I’m going to win you over to this idea, I promise. Back in 1968, when the Beatles song “Hey Jude” was dominating the airwaves, a little-known professor from the University of Maryland named Edwin Locke published a blockbuster article that would revolutionize the field of goal setting. “Toward a Theory of Task Motivation and Incentives,” based on Locke’s pioneering research, showed that setting goals led to higher performance in a wide range of domains. Whether it concerned office workers toiling in smoke-infested offices (it was the 1960s, remember), loggers felling timber in northern British Columbia, or truckers rolling along the blacktop, Locke demonstrated that setting goals improved performance in a statistically significant fashion. It wasn’t uncommon, for example, to see performance gains of more than 200 percent! Forget free love and flower children; the real revolution of the 1960s was goal setting. Locke went on to collaborate with a professor from the University of Toronto named Gary Latham. Together they conducted hundreds of studies on goal setting and reviewed hundreds more, all culminating in their 1990 magnum opus, A Theory of Goal Setting & Task Performance. Although it’s not a page turner a là Dan Brown or Agatha Christie, it’s a revelation. Locke and Latham demonstrated unequivocally that setting goals led to improved results, and as an added bonus, working toward a goal boosted motivation. Locke and Latham made clear that certain types of goals are better than others. Specific and challenging (but not too challenging) goals were critical to improved performance. Both of these characteristics (specificity and challenge) are vital to OKRs. The components of OKRs The heading of this section sounds cold and clinical, but the fact of the matter is that goal setting, especially using OKRs, can be … wait for it … fun. As Locke and Latham (see the previous section) made clear, goal setting improves motivation, and who doesn’t like the feeling of being motivated to pursue something you care about? More good news related to the question "what is an OKR?" is that the framework is light on terminology. It involves just three terms: objectives, key, and results. Actually, it’s three words and a conjunction. Yes, I looked it up; “and” is a conjunction. But really it’s just two terms: objectives and key results, more commonly referred to as OKRs. In the upcoming section, I define these terms and look at an example. Terminology matters in any kind of change initiative, including OKRs. You may find that some people will abbreviate the acronym to OKR, omitting the s. There is no agreed-upon acronym, but in this article, I use the plural OKRs and suggest that you do the same. However, what’s most important is that whatever acronym you choose, you use it consistently throughout your organization. At this point in the article, you might be thinking: OKR vs. KPI? (oh, the wonderful world of business acronyms). KPI stands for key performance indicator and it applies more to specific projects, programs, products, and other initiatives. OKRs are used more to outline organization and team goals. Defining an “objective” An objective is a statement of a broad, qualitative goal designed to propel the organization forward in a desired direction. There are a few things to unpack in that simple definition. The first is the word qualitative. This word points to the fact that objectives are aspirational statements and don’t include numbers. The second word to put under the microscope is organization. You can, and most likely will, create OKRs at multiple levels of your organization: the company-level; business unit; department team; and so on. Thus, the word organization in the definition is meant to be generic. Finally, the last part of the definition notes propelling the organization forward in a desired direction. This is the essence of an objective, which, to keep things nice and simple, asks, “What do we want to do?” Writing a basic objective Now comes one of the hardest tasks I faced in writing a book on OKRs: providing the very first example of an objective. Why was it so difficult? Because no matter what field or industry I draw on, there is a risk that some people will think, “Oh, so OKRs are for only those types of companies.” Or, “Well, that doesn’t apply to me.” Oy! Always remember that you can use OKRs anywhere and everywhere, from writing pop songs to ending malaria. So don’t read too much into the following example. Say that your company has a mobile app that has been crashing lately, much to users’ chagrin. That’s a strategic problem, and OKRs are very well-suited to help you overcome strategic challenges. So here’s a possible objective: Reduce mobile app crashes in order to increase user satisfaction. Ta-da! You’ve just had your first exposure to an actual OKR-style objective. Exciting, isn’t it? (Surely it’s one of those “remember where you were moments” as you soak this in.) This example objective is a relatively simple statement, but it is composed of three parts that all effective objectives have in common: It starts with a verb. By its very nature, an objective is action oriented, so you always want to begin one with a verb. Your verb choice will depend on the objective you’re striving toward, but every word matters in the objective, and the verb you choose sets the stage for the rest of the statement. The verb is followed by a description of what you want to do. In this case, you want to reduce mobile app crashes. Now, a lot of people would stop right there. “Reduce mobile app crashes” sounds like a worthy objective. But, there is a third component to a well-written objective, and that is … The “in order to” or “so that.” This final part captures the business impact of the first two components of the objective. Why is it important to reduce mobile app crashes? Because you believe that it will lead to increased user satisfaction. That final component is the most important, because it makes clear the strategic relevance of the objective: why it matters. I’ll bet you could stop reading right now and quickly brainstorm a dozen things you’d like to get done in the next few months. Doing that is relatively easy, but when you add that third component of why the objective is strategically important now, you quickly recognize what really matters, and which objectives are the critical ones to pursue. Share this formula for writing an objective with your team: Verb + what you want to do + in order to / so that (business impact) Some people bristle at formulas and a paint-by-number approach to objective creation, but goal setting is not a natural muscle for most people. They need all the help they can get in writing effective OKRs, especially in the beginning. Providing a formula or template simply gives people a leg up on the task without inhibiting their creativity in any way. After all, the formula doesn’t dictate what verb to use, or why their objective is important. It simply provides a path for creating objectives that will be technically sound and add value. For much more on setting OKRs and how to make them do wonders for your organization, check out my book OKRs For Dummies. Defining a key result Part of the OKR definition is "key result," and now you can turn your attention to that part. A key result is a quantitative statement that measures the achievement of a given objective. The key results answer the question “How will you know you’ve achieved the objective?” Of course, the most important word in the definition of “key result” is quantitative. A key result should consist of raw numbers, dollar amounts, percentages, or even dates, which you will use in the case of milestone key results. Writing key results In the earlier “Writing a basic objective” section, the example objective was “Reduce mobile app crashes in order to increase user satisfaction.” Now you have to decide what set of key results will demonstrate the achievement of that objective. You may want to try these: Study app crashes and determine the three most common causes by May 15. Develop fixes and update the app by June 1. Decrease the number of mobile app crashes from five to one. Increase app store rating from 4.2 to 4.8. A question I get frequently is, “How many key results should we have for each objective?” Although there is no absolute right or wrong answer to the question, a good rule of thumb (as rules of thumb go) is three to five. But beyond the number, you should think in terms of telling a story with your key results. By that I mean that the key results should work together in a coordinated way to demonstrate the success of the objective. Continuing with the example objective, if you’re going to reduce mobile app crashes, you first need to find out why the app is crashing by determining the common causes. That topic provides a good opening “chapter” in your story of success for this objective. This key result is a milestone, which is binary – either you achieve it or you don’t. Milestones are like hurdles that you need to get over in order to measure the ultimate business impact outlined in the objective. A milestone key result always includes a date — how quickly you believe you can achieve the milestone without sacrificing quality. After studying the reasons for the crashes, your next key result is devoted to developing fixes and updating the app. Think again of your story: First you study the causes, and then you develop fixes. This, too, is a milestone key result. Now things get interesting. Your third key result measures the reduction of mobile app crashes from five to one. This is a metric key result because it has numbers. This key result also slots nicely into your story. You’ve studied the crashes, applied a fix, and your hypothesis is that by doing so, you’ll see a reduction in app crashes. Hypothesis is a critical word in the context of OKRs, and in measurement in general. Whenever you measure anything, you’re making your best guess that it is related to your desired outcome. The final key result, “Increase app store rating from 4.2 to 4.8,” is also a metric, again because it has numbers. It also holds the distinction of being the most important of the example’s key results because it directly measures the business impact of increasing users’ satisfaction that was identified in the objective. Therefore, it’s a great and logical ending to a strategic story. When you're doing your OKR planning, I strongly encourage you to use the story concept as you're constructing your set of key results. Begin with the end in mind by identifying your business impact key result and then work backward, asking what drives, or leads to, that key result. Doing so will help you craft a comprehensive and cohesive set of key results.

Article / Updated 08-10-2023

In this article, I share the most common choices for where to create objectives and key results (OKRs) within an organization, including at the company level only, or for the company and business unit, or for the entire organization. However, just because these are common choices doesn’t mean they’re right for you. When it comes to deciding where to begin OKRs for your organization, you should give careful consideration to the best group or groups to lead the way on your implementation. That decision will hinge on the following: The amount of sponsorship you have at the top The availability of strategic background materials Your desire to foster collaboration Your philosophy on individual involvement in OKR setting I cover your primary options, those used by most organizations, in the following sections. There are other areas where OKRs are useful, including pilot groups, projects, and support groups, and while this article doesn’t cover those, you can learn about them in my book OKRs For Dummies. Creating OKRs at the company level only First, let me define some terms. When I say “company-level,” I mean OKRs that would exist at the very highest level of the company. So whether you’re General Motors, Netflix, or Uncle Morty’s Wax Emporium, company-level OKRs are those created and used to gauge execution at the very top of the house. Whenever possible (and sometimes it isn’t, as I’ll explain), drafting OKRs at the company level is the preferred way to kick off your efforts. Some benefits to starting at the top level Starting at the top has several benefits. Foremost is the fact that OKRs you create at this level make it crystal clear for your entire employee population what you consider to be the most important items for the organization to focus on in the days ahead. Also, I can’t overstate the communication value provided by these OKRs. Keeping in mind how few people can name their company’s top goals, by creating a small number of OKRs at this level, you send a powerful signal of what employees should pay attention to. You also provide the context that all lower-level teams require to create their own, connected OKRs. I was going to continue on to drift into my next point but I’m not sure you’d be with me. Your eyes may be seeing the words but your brain may be stuck on something I slipped into the last paragraph: “small number of OKRs.” You’re wondering, “What does he mean by ‘small number.'" Allow me to turn the tables on you. What do you think is a small but appropriate number of OKRs at the company-level? If you’re like most of the CEOs I’ve worked with, your estimate of the appropriate number of OKRs at the company will be very low, maybe two or three. If so, it’s likely because you want to instill the discipline of focus in your organization, and you’d be correct in wanting this. However, when it comes to actually drafting the OKRs, if you attempt to tell your story of success with such a succinct number of them, the tendency is to lump concepts together or devise such generic OKRs that they could fit any company in the world, Uncle Morty’s Wax Emporium included. The number is also impacted by your current situation. If you’re in crisis mode and mere survival is your goal, perhaps one or two well-chosen OKRs is exactly what you need. If, however, you’re in steady-state, moderate-growth mode, you may be able to balance four to seven OKRs. The old adage “less is more” applies to company-level OKRs. An abundance of OKRs at this level results in a lack of focus and prioritization, causing confusion and skepticism in your employees as to what truly matters. More benefits of starting at the top Having settled the number of OKRs quandary, you can consider a couple of additional advantages of starting at the top level. An obvious benefit is the accountability that it yokes to your executives. It is their responsibility to see these OKRs through, demonstrating success that lifts the entire company. Also, wins at this level will go a long way in generating enthusiasm for OKRs throughout the company. After people see the impact of OKRs at the very top, they’ll be anxious to create their own OKRs, making it clear for all to see how their unique piece of the puzzle fits into place. Now for the disadvantages of top-level OKRs Although beginning at the top with your OKRs offers some clear benefits, you should also consider some potential disadvantages before automatically making it your default choice: The potential of creating generic OKRs that could apply to any organization: The lack of specificity will greatly reduce the power of those OKRs to inspire lower-level teams, and may in fact signal to everyone that the status quo is just fine and your company’s biggest aspiration is to be like everyone else. The possibility that your OKRs will be irrelevant: This possibility comes into play if yours is a very large organization with dozens (or more) of business units around the world, each the size of significant businesses on their own. Think conglomerates with assets spanning the globe. For these companies, job one of the corporate group is allocating resources effectively, and most if not all of the metrics are financial in nature, providing little in terms of guidance or inspiration for lower-level groups. Prerequisites for company-level OKRs If you determine that company-level OKRs are the way to go for you, be aware of a couple of “must haves” before convening your C-suite colleagues for a drafting session. The first requirement is access to, and the participation of, your CEO. If you can’t rouse the sincere support of your CEO, you should reconsider not only starting at the top, but starting OKRs at all. A second prerequisite for company-level OKRs is the existence of some form of strategic plan for the organization from which you can derive the OKRs. They shouldn’t be created in a vacuum. If you’re sitting around a boardroom table engaging in blue-sky brainstorming and pondering, “Hmmm, what should we do?” you have a problem. OKRs will help answer the question, “To successfully execute our strategy, what has to happen?” but only if you have a strategy in the first place. The word strategy can be tricky, though. You don’t require a 300-page leather bound, gilt-edged report from the head office of a global consulting firm. Some answers to basic questions like, “What do we sell?” will get you on track. OKRs are a strategy-execution system, not a strategy-formation system. If you’re relying on the process to help you create a strategy, you’re putting the cart before the horse. Creating OKRs at both the company and team levels A second option for where to create OKRs is at both the company and business unit or team level, which provides the obvious advantage of involving lower-level groups, thereby upping the odds of execution because more people within the organization are creating aligned OKRs. Although this section’s heading suggests that OKRs would be created simultaneously at both the company and team levels, there should be some lag time between those efforts. Company OKRs are written first, widely communicated to ensure understanding, and only then, after that context has been created, should team-level OKRs be considered. Most of my firm’s clients choose this option (company and team OKRs) when embarking on an OKRs process. Deciding which teams and units to include Should you decide to go the route of OKRs at both the company and team levels, your next order of business will be defining the word team. I’m using that word in a very generic sense because as far as I know, no universal terms exist for creating a company’s organizational chart. For example, engineering and IT may be business units at your company, or they may be called departments, squads, or teams. Rather than focus on the titles appearing on your org chart, a simpler approach is to determine how far down the chart you want to go with your initial foray into OKRs. Maybe it’s the first level, those reporting directly to the CEO; or perhaps you’ll go two levels down on the chart. The obvious caveat is that the deeper you go, the more complex your rollout becomes, and you need to carefully consider how much complexity you can take on as you’re getting your feet wet with OKRs. A phased approach, going one level at a time, is the most conservative and likely the safest route; my experience shows that most organizations are excited to expose as many people as possible to the power of OKRs. Thus, going deeper faster has major appeal. Deciding between following the org chart or linking dependent teams If I had been writing this book back in, say, 2016, this section probably would have ended right here. Pick your teams and swish-boom, move on to the next section. But having worked on hundreds of engagements with organizations all over the world, I know it’s not that easy. You have another fundamental question to answer after you’ve chosen who will create OKRs at the team level: Do you write OKRs based simply on titles in the org chart? For example, Sales would create Sales OKRs, Marketing would create Marketing OKRs, and so on. Given its simplicity, this approach was the default answer for many organizations as OKRs rose to prominence, but a downside quickly emerged: Creating OKRs in this way had a tendency to reinforce silos and discourage cross-functional collaboration, which is anathema to the spirit of OKRs. Simply following the org chart may not be your best alternative for drafting team-based OKRs. Another option is to find teams that are highly dependent on one another and create OKRs for the merged entities. For example, in most organizations, the Sales and Marketing teams must work closely together in order to drive demand and revenue. Marketing finds the leads and supplies media and collateral, which supports Sales’s efforts to convert interested onlookers into paying customers. In this case, it could make sense to create OKRs for Sales and Marketing as one cross-functional unit, which of course enhances collaboration and diminishes the silo mentality. A potential challenge with the dependent-teams approach is the fact that in modern organizations, the pairings aren’t likely to be so clean because of the vast web of interconnectedness among most teams operating today. When I ask teams who they depend on for success, they rarely isolate their response to one other team. There’s often a dominant partner, but other dependencies exist as well. In deciding whether to use the dependent-teams method, determine whether the core relationship or partnership among two teams is strong enough to warrant working together on creating merged OKRs. In other words, if they can’t be successful without one another, there is a legitimate case for merged OKRs. Creating team OKRs for customer segments And now, in the spirit of a 3 a.m. infomercial peddling that hydrospa hand massager you just can’t live without: But wait, there’s more! You may also want to create team-based OKRs in reference to specific customer segments, or points along the way of the customer’s journey with your company. An online retailer, for instance, could create OKRs for teams aligned with the checkout process, or the subscription process, or something else. Doing so has the advantage of driving collaboration among teams devoted to a specific outcome, but on the flip side it’s not immune to the difficulty of ensuring that the relationship between the groups is strong enough to warrant shared OKRs. (In case you’re wondering, I didn’t make up the hydrospa hand massager; QVC really did sell them at $40.) Creating individual OKRs for the entire organization Encouraging OKRs at the organization-wide level includes, of course, the controversial practice of having individual OKRs. You may be thinking, “Google uses individual OKRs, right? So shouldn’t everyone?” And besides, is the question of using individual OKRs even up for debate, and what makes it a “controversial practice”? Yes, Google does it, but you may not want to Google, the poster child for all things OKRs, does have a history of using the framework at the individual employee level, but you have to keep in mind that OKRs were literally baked into the culture of Google practically from day one through John Doerr’s influence with the founders. The system grew along with the company and has become an ingrained part of their culture, which is something most organizations cannot say. But even within the Googleplex, there are whispers of discontent over the practice, and some question its value. Most organizations should consider individual level OKRs optional, if they consider it at all. If you do believe that individual OKRs are right for your company, it’s most likely because you can envision the system driving alignment throughout the entire enterprise. You also likely subscribe to the notion that giving employees the chance to write an OKR will boost their support of the system because they will no longer see OKRs as a “corporate thing” but something that they themselves engage with and can potentially benefit from. Both are valid points, but on the “pro” side of the ledger, that’s all I’ve got. Switching to the “con” side, however, reveals a host of potential problems with individual level OKRs. I’ll use an example of an individual OKR to introduce some challenges with the practice. Following is one from a software engineer — and I’m not picking on engineers; I’ve seen similar (in tone, style, and direction) from finance professionals, marketers, HR staff, you name it: Objective: Improve my programming skills to help the company release products faster. Key results: Read the five most popular books on programming on Amazon.com. Take three courses on programming languages. Attain Oracle MySQL certification. When charged with creating OKRs, most individuals will automatically default to personal development goals like those above. Absolutely nothing is wrong with personal development, and of course everyone should be actively encouraged to set goals for improvement. However, if you’re hewing to the true intent of OKRs, your aim is to demonstrate business impact. The key results in the preceding example are binary “outputs” that fail to demonstrate how this programmer is contributing to the company’s goal of releasing products faster in a quantitative fashion. Determining and communicating your OKRs philosophy, whether or not you’ll allow personal development goals as part of OKRs, will help ensure consistency in the OKRs created across the organization.

Cheat Sheet / Updated 08-01-2023

If you’re looking to transform your aspirations into measurable success, there is no better way than implementing the system of creating objectives and key results (OKRs). Countless organizations have utilized OKRs to create focus, enhance alignment, and achieve remarkable outcomes. Whether you aim to boost productivity, enhance innovation, or align your team's efforts toward a common vision, OKRs provide a framework that can propel you forward. This Cheat Sheet compiles essential tips and tricks to help you unlock the power of OKRs and effectively steer your path to success.

Article / Updated 06-28-2023

The Millennial generation, just like Boomers and Xers, has a long list of traits associated with them. If you are managing individual or a group of millennials, you will want to associate yourself with their most common traits. In the nature of KISS (keep it simple, stupid), these are the traits most commonly associated with the generation born between 1980 and 1995. Millennials are collaborative Millennials grew up with “There is no ‘I’ in ‘team’” posters in every classroom and teachers encouraging a group mentality to do great work. Social networking fostered informal group gatherings. How it manifests: Open workspaces, whiteboard walls, brainstorming sessions, working together in one room even if they’re working on different things, regular check-ins, and valuing team goals and team decisions over those of individuals. How others view it negatively: Other generations can view Millennials as needy, uncomfortable working independently (or unable to do so), constantly distracted, or unfocused. Millennials are tech savvy Millennials can’t remember a time without technological influence. Even if their computer or video game hours were limited, they still had time dictated by how many hours they could spend with a screen. They were the first generation to use the Internet when it went social and the first to get cellphones, and later smartphones, in their youth. How it manifests: Striving to use the latest digital devices; seeking tech solutions to streamline work; finding more comfort in text or instant message communication than the phone; and demanding upgrades in their work lives and personal lives, whether in the form of promotion, workspace, or process and procedure. How others view it negatively: Other generations can view Millennials as distracted, Facebook-obsessed, or unable to have a face-to-face conversation. They can also be intimidated by Millennials’ forceful request to use tech platforms that make other generations feel isolated, archaic, or uncomfortable. Millennials are adaptable Technology upgrades serve(d) as a catalyst for change. Since Millennials’ whole world growing up was constantly changing, they learned to be malleable with any future shift. To Millennials, change and disruption — in a broad sense — are critical to success. How it manifests: When change occurs at work, they are the most comfortable. In fact, most times, they embrace it or seek to make it happen themselves. In the social world, they are progressive like any young generation before them and fight for progressive societal changes. How others view it negatively: They have no loyalty to structure or tradition if they can so easily adapt to a new environment. Adapting is good, but demanding that others adapt at the same pace is not.