Setting high performance objectives
The foundation of great Performance Management is setting clear, robust objectives. Because they are so fundamental, much has been written and taught on this topic, and the various methodologies for setting them. The most common approach is the OKR (Objectives & Key Results) system. The concept is solid - Objectives provide clear, ambitious goals, while Key Results make them measurable and tangible. In practice, though, OKRs have recurring problems. Managers confuse Objectives with tasks and activities with Key Results. OKRs also leave employees to figure out the “how” by themselves, which often translates to a lack of support or input.
Another popular tool is the V2MOM, developed by Marc Benioff at Salesforce. V2MOM stands for Vision, Values, Methods, Obstacles and Measures. It’s a more detailed methodology and can provide real clarity and focus when done well. It aligns individual goals to the company’s Vision and Values, can provide transparency (at Salesforce, everyone’s V2MOMs are visible to everyone else) and forces people to anticipate potential issues and develop mitigation plans. The framework is a heavy lift though and can create a lot of work, with the Values element often becoming a token exercise.
Having trialled both of these approaches and several others (the Balanced Scorecard, MOST, etc.), I struggled to find one that balances the clarity required to be effective with the autonomy employees crave and the alignment organisations need for their efforts to truly compound. So, we created our own system, which we call OAKAPs.
OAKAPs are an evolution of OKRs, expanding the model to increase the emphasis on practical application, connect objectives to each other and ensure that employees get both the space they need to decide their approach and the required input and support from their manager. Like most other Performance Management tools, OAKAP is an acronym describing the method. It stands for:
Objective: what is the goal you’re trying to achieve? This should be specific, ambitious and time bound.
Alignment: how does this Objective align to a higher-level or longer-term Objective? This forces both employees and managers to think about how their work contributes to the overall direction of the organisation. It’s the golden thread in action.
Key Results: just as in OKRs, what are the measurable, specific outcomes that define success. Key Results should be numbers, or things you can attribute a definitive “achieved/not achieved” statement to.
Action Plan: the specific actions the employee or team will take to achieve their Objective.
Ideally, each employee, team and department should be limited to 3-5 OAKAP blocks at a time. When everything’s a priority, nothing is.
One quick note on the application of OAKAPs - the Action Plan must be the employee’s own. Employees and managers should agree Objectives and Key Results, with managers checking Alignment, before the Employee gets to work on their Action Plan. This Action Plan is then submitted to the manager for approval. Managers are encouraged to ask questions and make suggestions but ultimately, the more an employee feels that they are delivering an Action Plan of their own development, the more engagement, accountability and ownership they will feel towards it.
I’ve found that using OAKAPs has created more clarity, more ownership and more alignment in the teams I manage. If you give it a try, I’d love to hear how you find it - let me know on tom@versapia.ai.
(P.S. If you know someone who needs to read this today, send it to them and encourage them to subscribe to the Versapiens blog. If you haven’t subscribed yet, come join us on our journey through the intersection between culture, technology and business.)