Instead of setting rigid goals, the OHL framework defines objectives as puzzles. Teams then form hypotheses on how to solve them and are measured on their learnings through a cycle of three questions: "How well did it work?", "What did you learn?", and "What will you try next?"
Related Insights
Instead of a universal definition, "real progress" is achieved by first defining what change you want to see in your organization. You then adapt your ways of working—strategy, discovery, OKRs—to support that specific goal, rather than just following a generic playbook.
The human brain is wired to enjoy solving challenges. Asking "What puzzles would you like to solve?" sparks passion and ownership. In contrast, asking "What are your goals?" often elicits a feeling of obligation and a list of burdensome tasks, draining the work of its inherent meaning and excitement.
OKRs and SMART goals are repackaged versions of Peter Drucker's 1940s "Management by Objectives." This framework was designed for simple, repetitive tasks on an assembly line, making it fundamentally unsuited for today's complex, knowledge-based work where problems have no single right solution.
For startups tackling monumental challenges, complex planning frameworks like OKRs are a distraction. Instead, maintain a clear, ambitious long-term vision and focus the entire company's energy on executing the immediate next step with maximum speed and quality.
To move beyond static playbooks, treat your team's ways of working (e.g., meetings, frameworks) as a product. Define the problem they solve, for whom, and what success looks like. This approach allows for public reflection and iterative improvement based on whether the process is achieving its goal.
A common OKR failure is assigning teams high-level business metrics (like ARR) which they can only contribute to, not directly influence. Success requires focusing on influenceable customer behaviors while demonstrating how they correlate to the company's broader contribution-level goals.
The culture around OKRs often treats the framework as gospel. When teams struggle, the default response is "you're doing them wrong," labeling critics as heretics. This prevents genuine discussion about whether the system is fundamentally flawed, trapping organizations in a cycle of failed implementation.
Instead of stigmatizing failure, LEGO embeds a formal "After Action Review" (AAR) process into its culture, with reviews happening daily at some level. This structured debrief forces teams to analyze why a project failed and apply those specific learnings across the organization to prevent repeat mistakes.
Solely measuring a team's output fails to capture the health of their collaboration. A more robust assessment includes tracking goal achievement, team psychological safety, role clarity, and the speed of execution. This provides a holistic view of team effectiveness.
Use the GROW model (Goal, Reality, Options, Way Forward) to structure coaching conversations. This simple set of question categories helps leaders guide their team members to find their own solutions, fostering independence and critical thinking without the leader needing to provide the answer directly.
