Aligning Team OKRs: A Practical Guide for Real Organizational Focus
A practical guide to OKR cascading and OKR localization that actually works
Watch the YouTube video overview of this blog post via the video above
Overcoming Team OKR Alignment Frustrations
If aligning team OKRs in your organization feels like more of a headache than a help, you're not alone. Many leaders and teams start with great intentions but quickly find classic cascading and localization create confusion, overload, and a blizzard of objectives. The good news? There is a practical, less stressful way to use team OKRs to create genuine focus and drive results.
Let’s break down why traditional approaches fall short and explore a smarter method to align goals, increase performance, and make OKRs work for your organization.
The Problem Every OKR Coach Faces
The number one question I get in intake calls from organizations interested in working with me on Objectives and Key Results? "How do we cascade OKRs down to every team and individual?"
My answer is a spicy take: You don't.
After training 2,000+ OKR coaches across 300+ organizations globally—including Fortune 500 companies—I've seen firsthand how traditional cascading models can create overload instead of the focus and clarity OKR systems are supposed to deliver.
If your team OKRs feel more like a burden than a clarity tool, you're not alone. The conventional wisdom about aligning OKRs through rigid cascading is fundamentally flawed, and there's a better way.
The Mathematical Nightmare of Traditional OKR Cascading
Here's what happens when organizations follow the standard cascading advice from popular OKR approaches:
Level 1 (Company): 4 objectives with 4-6 key results each = ~20 key results
Level 2 (Functions): 5-person senior team each creates 3-5 objectives with 4-6 key results = ~120 key results total
Level 3 and beyond: The multiplication continues exponentially
The result? A volume of goals only software can manage.
I've watched this play out repeatedly with clients. During alignment reviews—where we examine company-level, functional-level, and team OKRs to ensure nothing conflicts—review teams (including CEOs!) often lose focus partway through and essentially give up, saying "okay, it's good enough" after a partial review … rather than wade through the volume that old-school cascading often yields.
If leadership can't focus long enough to review the full set of OKRs, how can this system possibly deliver the focus it promises?
A methodology designed to create focus, clarity, and alignment instead risks yielding a system of goals that's untenable for anyone to wrap their heads around.
Why Key Results Don’t Become Nested Objectives
Traditional cascading models make a critical error: they suggest taking upline key results and making them subordinate objectives. This — in my experience — just doesn’t work.
Here's the fundamental difference:
Objectives are directional goals—your "what to aim for and why it matters"
Key results are aspirational, objectively measurable targets that clarify progress toward an objective
Key results are not objectives. When you cascade key results down to fill the “objective” spot, teams almost always create checklists of to-do items instead of empirically measurable key results. This happens because most teams lack the authority to influence significant, measurable outcomes that align to a single upline key result.
What teams actually need is clarity on how their work supports higher-level goals—not an exhaustive multiplication of objectives that don't serve their reality.
The No-BS Alternative: Flexible OKR Localization
Instead of forcing rigid cascading through multiple organizational layers, I use a flexible localization model with clients that focuses on quality over quantity:
Level 1 & 2: Model Excellence
Create strong, high-quality, best-practice, cross-functional OKRs at the company (Level 1) and function-specific OKRs at the functional (Level 2) level. Leaders with more authority and autonomy should model what good OKRs look like and demonstrate the behaviors of safety, curiosity, and experimentation they want to encourage throughout the organization.
Level 3+: Bottom-Up Alignment
Below Level 2, some objectives or key results may roll down to responsible teams or people — but rather than forcing a strict localization, we shift to a bottom-up approach where teams can align their work using three critical questions:
"What else is important for my team to achieve, to further our upline OKRs?"
"Why does it matter?"
"How will we know we're successful (or making quantifiable progress)?"
This approach yields localized goals that can be reviewed for alignment by upline and cross-functional stakeholders without drowning everyone in volume and complexity.
Choosing the Right Goal Tool for the Job
Not every team activity needs to be captured in OKRs. Teams should choose the appropriate goal-setting tool based on their actual needs:
When Teams Need OKRs:
Growth, transformation, or innovation efforts
Areas requiring improvement or measurable change
When outcomes matter beyond just completion
To address "watermelon metrics" (efforts that are reported as “in the green” but turn “red” on the actual outcome failing to be achieved)
When Teams Need Milestones Instead:
Run-the-business activities that keep operations running
Work where completion is more important than experimental or speculative transformation, growth, or innovation
Routine maintenance and steady-state activities
Example: A payroll team might not see a key result at the company level that directly addresses their work. But they might know that to support organizational growth goals, improving payroll accuracy and timing is critical. Rather than forcing this into a cascaded OKR structure, they can set meaningful local goals that support broader organizational performance.
Real-World Benefits of Flexible Localization
Working with this model creates several advantages:
Fewer but Clearer Goals: Teams focus on what truly matters at their level rather than managing administrative overhead of excessive OKRs.
Manageable Alignment Reviews: Leadership can actually review and provide meaningful guidance on goal alignment.
Cross-Functional Success: Initiatives can have their own OKRs without drowning in complexity.
Team Autonomy: Teams choose appropriate goal structures for their context while maintaining strategic alignment.
Reduced Administrative Burden: Organizations spend more time achieving goals rather than managing lengthy creation cycles.
This approach acknowledges that not every key result needs to trace directly back to company priorities. By allowing teams to set objectives that reflect their realities while communicating how their work fits the bigger picture, organizations achieve clarity without chaos.
Implementation: Getting Started with Flexible Localization
If you're ready to move beyond cascading chaos, start here:
Audit your current OKR volume. How many total objectives and key results exist across all levels? If you can't easily count them or review them in a single session, you have a volume problem.
Focus on Level 1 and 2 quality. Ensure your company and functional OKRs follow best practices: clear objectives that answer "what and why," with aspirational, measurable key results including a mix of outcome goals and progress goals (or leading indicators).
Empower teams with the 3-question framework shared above. Let Level 3+ teams determine what additional goals they need to support upline OKRs and maximize organizational performance.
Choose the appropriate “goal tool” for the job. Not everything needs to be an OKR. Use milestones for completion-based work and OKRs for growth, innovation, and transformation efforts.
Test alignment, not volume. Regular alignment reviews should focus on ensuring goals point in the same direction, not checking every box in a massive system.
Making OKR Localization Work for Your Organization
The flexible localization approach described above lets your organization create and maintain strategic alignment without drowning in administrative complexity. By focusing on high-quality goal modeling at the top levels and empowering teams to align their work meaningfully, you create the focus and clarity that OKRs promise.
Remember: the goal isn't to have OKRs at every level—it's to have clarity, alignment, and focus that drives measurable results. Sometimes that means fewer OKRs, not more.
Ready to implement flexible OKR localization in your organization? The principles and framework I've shared here are just the beginning. For a deeper dive into No-BS OKRs methodology and hands-on implementation tools, check out my private podcast series where I break down exactly how to make OKRs work without the overwhelm.
Sara Lobkovich is a strategy coach, OKR activist, and author of "You Are A Strategist: Use No-BS OKRs to Get Big Things Done." She has trained over 2,000 OKR coaches across 300+ organizations globally and helps purpose-led organizations shift strategy from overwhelming to achievable.
