How OKRs Become ‘Delivery Checklists’ and Why It Matters, According to Janna Bastow

In a recent LinkedIn post, Janna Bastow discusses a common pitfall in the implementation of Objectives and Key Results (OKRs), highlighting how the framework can devolve into a mere “delivery checklist” rather than a strategic thinking tool.

Bastow, a prominent voice in product management, observed a pattern where OKRs, intended to drive learning and outcomes, are subtly transformed. This shift, she argues, often stems from an organizational environment that discourages uncertainty and prioritizes predictability.

“When OKRs start reading like a delivery checklist, something upstream has already gone wrong.”

This observation, shared with a ProdPad Partner, points to a deeper issue than the OKR framework itself. Bastow elaborates on the subtle, yet critical, changes that occur:

The Subtle Shift from Outcomes to Activity

Bastow identifies several key indicators that an OKR implementation has strayed from its intended purpose. According to her analysis, the very nature of key results can change, moving away from measurable outcomes towards simple task completion.

• Key results quietly turn into commitments.
• Dates replace learning.
• Outcomes get swapped for activity.

This transformation, as Janna Bastow notes, is not typically due to a lack of understanding of OKRs by the teams using them. Instead, she posits that the underlying organizational culture plays a significant role.

When Uncertainty Isn’t Welcome

The core of the problem, according to Bastow, lies in the environment in which OKRs are deployed. When an organization implicitly or explicitly discourages uncertainty and values a predictable workflow above all else, the purpose of OKRs can be undermined.

“Usually that’s not because teams don’t understand OKRs. It’s because uncertainty isn’t welcome. Predictability feels safer than discovery.”

In such environments, Bastow argues, the focus shifts from exploration and strategic discovery, which are inherent to true OKR implementation, to a more controlled and measurable execution of predefined tasks. This leads to a situation where OKRs cease to be a tool for strategic thinking and instead become a mechanism for reporting progress on assigned activities.

The Framework vs. The Environment

Bastow makes a crucial distinction: the issue is rarely with the OKR framework itself, but rather with the context in which it is applied. The framework provides a structure, but it is the organizational culture and leadership’s approach to uncertainty and learning that ultimately dictate its effectiveness.

“The framework isn’t the issue. The environment it’s used in is.”

This perspective suggests that for OKRs to be effective, organizations must cultivate an environment that embraces learning, acknowledges uncertainty, and values the pursuit of ambitious outcomes over the mere completion of tasks. Without this supportive environment, even the best-intentioned OKR implementations risk becoming a bureaucratic exercise, as Janna Bastow points out.

Bastow concludes by inviting further discussion, asking about the most common OKR anti-patterns observed in real teams, signaling a call for shared learning and best practices in the field of objective setting and strategic execution.