Q2 2025 OKR Forecast Part 2: Flexibility, Timing, and Hot Takes with Three Trusted OKR Experts

CareersTech and Tools
Written By Sara Lobkovich

The OKR Trio is back with Part 2 of their brutally honest Q2 2025 forecast, and they're not holding back.

Sara Lobkovich, Maria Rowcliffe, and Natalie Webb tackle the questions you've been asking about rigid vs. flexible OKR approaches, timing models that actually work, and trends we’re seeing in tool choices.

But here's where it gets spicy: they're sharing their most controversial OKR opinions, speed round style!

From leaders trying to weaponize OKRs as surveillance tools to the popular (but problematic) advice to limit teams to just one strategic priority, this conversation will challenge norms you might not be able to imagine actually exist out there.

You'll discover why monthly check-ins might mean you're tracking instead of managing, how geography is shaping OKR strategy differently across continents, and why Excel is making a surprising comeback in the enterprise. Plus, Sara drops a financial metrics hot take that might make your CFO squirm.

This isn't your typical goal-setting advice. It's three veteran practitioners sharing what they're really seeing in the field, complete with the controversies, contradictions, and hard-won insights that only come from years in the trenches.

Episode Highlights:

  • Quarterly vs. Trimesterly Planning: why the Q4 “drop-off” is real—and how cadence choices impact OKR adoption across teams

  • Biweekly Reinforcement Loops: how one leadership team’s consistent review rhythm is accelerating organization-wide buy-in

  • Tool Sprawl & Excel Resurgence: why many orgs are ditching premium OKR platforms for scrappier, process-first setups

  • When Tools Hurt More Than Help: the danger of letting project management tools define your key results

  • Hot Takes on OKRs: financial metrics don’t belong in key results (and one-size-fits-all “just one OKR” advice? Hard pass)

  • Big Brother OKRs?: pushing back when leadership wants to use OKRs for surveillance instead of strategy

  • Q3 Preview: a deep dive on execution, achievement—and how to actually decide what OKR tooling makes sense for your org

Key Concepts Explored:

  • Hybrid Localization Approaches

    • Leadership sets objectives, teams shape Key Results

    • Themes as bridges when objectives don't translate locally

    • KRs and Sub-KRs for fast-moving Scrum teams

    • Moving away from rigid objective cascading

  • Timing Model Evolution

    • Biweekly check-ins integrated with Scrum cycles

    • The discipline of at least twice-weekly KR management

    • Quarterly vs. trimester cycle trade-offs

    • Event-triggered OKR adjustments for volatile environments

  • Tool Integration Strategies

    • Process-first, tool-second implementation approach

    • Excel resurgence due to cost considerations

    • Avoiding dueling OKR and project management platforms

    • Recognition that L1 and L2 math doesn't require specialty software

  • Controversial Practices and Hot Takes

    • OKRs as surveillance tools (problematic)

    • Arbitrary "one OKR only" mandates (counterproductive)

    • Financial metrics as KPIs vs. Key Results (contentious)

    • Project deliverables masquerading as OKRs (misleading)

Notable Quotes:

"If you have a KR that you only manage monthly, you are not managing it, you're tracking it. Because you essentially have two data points, and then the quarter is over." — Maria Rowcliffe [00:06:00]

"Once we learn the words and leadership is modeling the words and meanings, then the rigidity can come out of the framework." — Sara Lobkovich [00:04:00]

"Financial metrics belong in mandatories and budgets. They're KPIs, they aren't key results." — Sara Lobkovich [00:15:00]

"Bad news only gets worse with time. So the earlier they can raise an issue, I think the better." — Natalie Webb [00:07:00]

Chapters:

[00:00:00] Introduction: Welcome Back to Part 2 of Q2 OKR Update
[00:02:00] Rigid vs. Flexible OKR Models: Finding the Right Balance
[00:05:00] Timing Models: Annual, Quarterly, and Everything In Between
[00:06:00] The Managing vs. Tracking Debate: Why Monthly Isn't Enough
[00:08:00] Geographic Strategy Differences: Chaos vs. Stability
[00:10:00] Tool Sprawl: Excel's Comeback and Platform Fatigue
[00:13:00] Controversial OKR Practices: Hot Takes and Push-Backs
[00:15:00] Financial Metrics Hot Take and Contact Information
[00:17:00] Q3 Preview and Final Thoughts

Upcoming Events:

  • Catch Sara at the World OKR Summit! She’ll be speaking this October 30–31: okrsummit.org

Book Update:

  • You Are A Strategist: Use No-BS OKRs to Get Big Things Done: New book available in print and ebook. More info is here!

Natalie’s Links and Info:

Maria’s Link and Resources:

Sara’s Links and Resources:

Find full show notes and the episode transcript via https://findrc.co/thinkydoers !

Full Episode Transcript:

Sara: [00:00:00] Welcome to the Thinkydoers podcast. Thinkydoers are those of us drawn to deep work, where thinking is working, but we don't stop there. We're compelled to move the work from insight to idea, through the messy middle, to find courage and confidence to put our thoughts into action. I'm your host, Sara Lobkovich. I'm a strategy coach, a huge goal-setting and attainment nerd, and board-certified health and wellness coach working at the overlap of work life well-being I'm. Also a Thinkydoer. I'm here to help others find more satisfaction, less frustration, less friction, and more flow in our work. My mission is to help changemakers like you transform our workplaces and world. So let's get started.

Sara: Welcome back for the second part of this Q2 2025 OKR update with Maria [00:01:00] Rowcliffe and Natalie Webb. If you haven't listened to part one, go back and check that out first, where we discuss an update to our perspectives on generative AI and OKRs, the evolution we're seeing in localizing and cascading practices, and how different retrospective approaches can drive organizational and OKR learning. In the second part, we're gonna dive into some great questions from listeners about rigid versus flexible OKR models, different timing approaches, managing OKRs across different tools and different teams, and we'll even end with a few OKR hot takes. Each of us brings a unique perspective based on our diverse client experiences, so you get a really well-rounded view of what's happening in the OKR world right now. Let's jump back in.

Sara: One of the questions that came in was, are companies shifting from rigid top-down or bottom-up models to [00:02:00] something more blended? For example, leadership sets the objectives, teams shape the KRs. What are you seeing in terms of rigid execution of an OKR model versus more flexible approaches?

Maria: The clients I work with are doing more of that because they're working with me. They already have a process where they are doing the localization in the way that they are, and it's working. And nobody actually thinks it's overly bureaucratic, and they get the outcomes that they need from it. I am not telling them to change, right? If oftentimes the struggle is that they're not getting the results that they want to, people are beginning to say, “Why are we doing this again?” Then that's what I typically propose to them to try.

Sara: How about you, Natalie?

Natalie: Yeah, you know, some companies always have some weird old thing. They have something that they wanna retire or sunset, and it's typically some old waterfall... something weird. So I'm seeing more of a blend. And I see the teams that are moving really fast. They don't have lots of layers of objectives, but they almost have like KRs and Sub-KRs. I find [00:03:00] those folks to be more truly Scrum-agile folks versus some of the other stuff that's like sunsetting an old system that doesn't have support anymore. More traditional waterfall. So I think there's always a blend for me. And it's interesting that everybody has somewhere weird old thing that they need to get rid of. It's like, just unplug that server and see who calls, because it's just a mess, you know? But they're always trying to figure out how to sunset it or replace it, it seems, or upgrade, like, I'm hearing a lot of SAP to HANA happening. Oracle as well. So yeah, it's a blend for me.

Sara: I've always been a little bit different on this front. That to me, "objectives" is a word and "key results" is a word, and they fit into a strategic model with other words in them. So the rigid approach to OKRs, I use a structured or scaffolded approach in the first quarter. Or if a team struggles to [00:04:00] learn quickly and adopt quickly, the first two quarters. But then my mature state is a tremendous amount of flexibility. It's like, once we learn the words and leadership is modeling the words and meanings, then the rigidity can come out of the framework.

 We just have shared language and behavior, and we know what those words mean and we can use them where we need them. I'm also in the same camp of less localizing of objectives. I find alignment to be more coherent when we do less objective localization. I still use themes for each objective. And so if the objective doesn't make sense to a local team, the theme usually does. And if they wanna write an objective for some reason, they can. But yeah, I'm seeing the same thing as an efficiency. So the approaches that I use, yeah, we start out structured and scaffolded just until we learn the words and meanings, and then things can get much more flexible in terms of approach. This also leads into the [00:05:00] next question that we got, which is, what are your thoughts on different timing models? Annual, quarterly, trimester, rolling, event-triggered, like for product launches, acquisitions, leadership changes, etc. Natalie, what are you seeing in terms of timing models?

Natalie: Yeah, I'm seeing a variation. when I'm working with a Scrum team. They're incorporating their OKR check-ins every two weeks with their Scrums, which is great. But other teams that are not running Scrum sprints are doing more monthly updates, weekly, biweekly, and then monthly. So the timing is different, I think, depending on the team.

Maria: So this might be one way we disagree a little bit.

Yeah. So I actually wrote a post about this because I am of the opinion that if you have a KR that you only manage monthly, you are not managing it, you're tracking it. Because you essentially have two data points, and then the quarter is over. And yes, there still might be [00:06:00] some environments or for some KRS where the shift is so slow that monthly is okay. I would argue that there's very few of those, and I can't really come up with one. And so I think if you don't look at it at least twice a week, you're not managing it. You're tracking it. Because things are changing so fast now, and I think it's hard that if you don't have a habit of actually managing on a more ongoing basis, it becomes not important, right? That's why many of these monthly business reviews ends up being just not discussions around what got in the way, what do we need to do, because that might have happened several weeks ago and we moved on. And we are not gonna actually know if we did the right thing until next month. So I really believe in the discipline of doing it at least biweekly, preferably weekly. And it doesn't mean that it has to be a heavy hand in terms of spending hours and hours on it. But somebody, and preferably the team, [00:07:00] at any point is gonna be able to articulate, how are we doing on this KR and why? Doesn't mean that it has to be half a day discussion of it. But if the point is to actively manage outcomes, the way I think about it is reduce or eliminate surprises, right? So that when at the end of the quarter you don't say, "Is there something that happened that we could have learned about earlier and then actually take action on?" Then I think that it is that the more recurring cycle is needed. And again, if the things that you are actively trying to manage are slow moving, then maybe monthly is enough. But I don't know many things that are like that anymore.

Natalie: I can throw a couple out and see if you agree. Um, legal, merger and acquisition, tax team, surveys, customer surveys under customer set. Some of that stuff doesn't move that fast.

Maria: Technology, i'm with you. Bad news only gets worse with time. So the earlier they can raise an issue, I think the better.I would argue though that if there's something that they don't have to check in on every week or know how it is [00:08:00] going, then they might have the wrong KRs. Then there's actually KPIs more, that is, more health checks. So KRs, in my mind, should be something that you're actively looking to improve. If it's just a health metric, then absolutely, once a month might be fine.

Sara: The other thing I'm seeing too is I was one of the folks who was advocating for longer OKR cycles, like trimester as opposed to quarterly, and now, totally reversed course. Quarterly is even hard, for some clients right now with the volatility in the operating environment. And I am seeing clients developing less key results, also because of the volatility. So there's more development of mandatories or commits that have to be achieved. And then I am seeing a little bit fewer. But on that time horizon question, in the US, different overseas, like it's so cool to be working in the US and Australia because Australia's just humming along. Like, We're doing what we always...” you know? And then my messaging in the US [00:09:00] right now is "strategy during chaos" and my messaging in Australia is "go team."

Maria: Yeah.

Sara: That is something where I've changed, because I was working with clients around that shift to trimesterly. What I find with trimesterly implementations is we don't lose Q4, where with the quarterly implementations, we tend to lose Q4 because we're focused on Q1. But the other reason I'm going back to quarterly is actually this leadership team that I'm working on a biweekly basis. So I facilitate their OKR review biweekly. With most implementations, we have those early adopters, and then there might be people who don't just lag, they just perma-resist. And what I'm seeing with this group is that every two-week learning and reinforcement is bringing everyone along. Like, they're really making big progress on adoption. So yeah, I've, that's the place where my thinking has changed. I have a last question. I'm gonna spring [00:10:00] on you. But let's do a lightning answer to our last viewer question, which was: With tool sprawl, are orgs more likely to fold OKRs into what they're already using, like Notion, Asana, Salesforce, instead of managing separate OKR platforms? What are you seeing, Natalie?

Natalie: I'm seeing more Excel use than ever, actually. And I think it's to get away from the ARR of the seat cost of some of the tools.

Sara: How about you, Maria?

Maria: Yes. Because I do think that part of what we do when we talk to clients these days, identify why you're doing this, and then figure out what the process is gonna be, and then figure out what the way you're gonna be managing things. Because if it's a tool-led thing and you start with the tool, and then the process isn't there, we don't advise clients to do that. Doesn't mean that we won't, at the end of the day, suggest that they might get one, but that's not where to start. And so I'm definitely seeing the more scrappy as well. And Excel is [00:11:00] probably the one that I see the most also.

Natalie: Yeah.

Sara: I am also seeing, it's similar for me. Because so much of the math happens at L1 and L2, that can be managed without specialty software. Where I am still seeing specialty software adoption is in organizations that don't have an existing, kind of coherent, approach to program and project management. So that is somewhere where the tools help, because then we don't have that dueling OKR platform and project management kind of conflict that we run into. If they've got a really established program and project management mechanism, then I just remind clients, don't let the project and program management eat the OKRs. Like you have to really define the behaviors and what we're doing so that we don't wind up with just project management.

Natalie: It's like teams are using what [00:12:00] works for them.

Sara: Yeah. I would argue that the tools, that the project management tools out there that have added on OKRs, tend to also have examples of OKRs that are project deliverables and milestones. Because that's their bread and butter, right? And so I typically say: use stuff for project management, because they're great. But these are not what you actually wanna be managing, because you're already managing those here. So why would you convert that and call key results when you already have a process and a tool for doing that? Okay, so let's do another, I'm gonna add something else to our Q3 agenda, and let's talk about how to make the decision on tooling. So we're not gonna talk about specific tools, but let's talk about, like, how you advise clients about tooling, and what we've, because we've all worked on the tool side, and we've worked on the services side, so I think that would be really helpful for folks. I'm gonna ask one last question of you. And it's okay to take a minute to [00:13:00] think about it, because I didn't have this one in our plan, but then I was like, oh, this is cool to talk about. So, what is the most controversial thing you can think of in your OKR practice? What are you doing or saying that you think other people would be like, "Oh my gosh, that's nuts"?

Natalie: I have one. I've had a few leaders want me to use OKRs as Big Brother tospy on their teams, and that's just so shady. I really don't like that. It was never meant to be that way. And so that's one thing I really push back on. It's like, if you need to further examine a team and how they're performing, I say lean in and do that internally, and don't use OKRs as a guise to a Big Brother, a team. That's the one I'm like, yuck.

Maria: One thing that I object very much to, and I know that this is, there's a lot of people that advocate for teams only setting one or two OKRs. You should just have one. There should be one strategic priority. And I am so against that. And I think back to your point, Natalie, then you're gonna have this one KR that just hangs out there, and then all [00:14:00] these other things that people are spending time on. And so the ability to use your OKR to understand what to say no to is non-existent. So the whole idea about making work purposeful has essentially gone away. And so that is one thing that I have a few pet peeves that I'm like, “Don't do that.” And I think there's a lot of people out there advocating for, “You should only have one strategic priority. One OKR per quarter, or two.” That, to me that arbitrarily, I absolutely am for having focus, but arbitrarily setting one is just, yeah, I'm very much against it.

Sara: That's good food for thought for me. I don't recommend setting one, but I do sometimes have teams that only create one objective and some key results, or they localize an objective and a handful of key results. And that is a good point, that if we do that, doesn't help us know how to make decisions about what to stop doing. I mean it might be some teams where most or all the work that they do is actually [00:15:00] encompassing by that key result. But I think that's the discussion that needs to happen to say, "Based on how we contribute to these things, this is the only one that we're actually contributing towards." Then that's fine. But it's the arbitrary that says companies, meaning at the enterprise level, or any team should only have one. All right. I'm just gonna say something. I'm gonna stop talking. I'm not gonna explain it. So my hot take is that, financial metrics belong in mandatories and budgets. They're KPIs, they aren't key results.All right. So Maria, if people wanna find you, how can they find and connect with you?

Maria: Easiest way is to find me on LinkedIn, and my last name is R-O-W-C-L-I-F-F-E.

Sara: And Natalie, where can people find you?

Natalie: Same as Maria. LinkedIn's probably the easiest way to reach me. And yeah, I appreciate you giving us that shout-out. And congratulations again on your book. So proud of you, my friend. It's [00:16:00] a killer book. I love it. And I love that people in your sphere and outside of your sphere are stepping up and saying, "This is great stuff." Congratulations.

Sara: Thank you so much for everybody who tuned in. You can find me at saralobkovich.com and youareastrategist.com for information about the book, also available almost wherever you buy books. We'll see you back here in Q3, if you've been here for the whole recording, you know what the agenda is. We will definitely take questions, though. The questions are awesome, so get your questions into us and we'll answer as many as we can.

Sara: And that's a wrap on our Q2 OKR update with the OKR Dream team. I wanna thank Maria and Natalie for sharing their experience and insights today. As you can see, there's never a shortage of evolving thinking in the OKR space, and I just feel so lucky to have incredibly talented folks like this to chat with live here for you. We're already planning [00:17:00] our Q3 gathering where we'll focus on goal achievement, implementation, and execution. Since Q3 is when we're really driving hard for goal achievement before year end. We're also gonna talk about how to make decisions about tooling since we've all worked on both the tool and services side of OKRs. If you have questions you'd like us to address in our next quarterly gathering or sooner, please send them our way. You can reach me at hello@redcurrantco.com. All three of us are on LinkedIn and I'll put all the information in the show notes. We value your questions and we might just answer some of them before our next quarterly update

All right, friends, that's it for today. Stay in the loop with everything going on around here by visiting findrc.co/newsletter and joining my mailing list. Got questions? My email addresses are too hard to spell, so visit findrc.co/contact and shoot me a note [00:18:00] that way. You'll also find me at @saralobkovich on most of your favorite social media platforms. For today's show notes, visit findrc.co/thinkydoers. If there's someone you'd like featured on this podcast, drop me a note. And if you know other Thinkydoers who'd benefit from this episode, please share. Your referrals, your word of mouth, and your reviews are much appreciated. I'm looking forward to the questions this episode sparks for you, and I look forward to seeing you next time.

The camera view is looking down on a person sitting in a chair holding a tablet and digital ink pen. On the tablet is the No-BS OKRs Workbook, which has a dark blue cover with colorful handdrawn paper airplanes, graphs, pencils.

You don’t have to OKR alone!

Snag a copy of the No-BS OKRs Workbook PDF NOW for only $19 USD, and get started working with OKRs today!

Prefer a short course? Check out our fully-independent and self-paced short course (regularly $99, now only $49)

You do not have to OKR alone! And, I’d love to help!

-Sara Lobkovich, OKR Coach & Principal Consultant

Episode 45 podcast cover art for Thinkydoers featuring three professional women against a pink gradient background. Title reads "Q2 2025 OKR FORECAST PART 2" in bold black letters with "EP. 45" in top right corner. Left to right: Maria Rowcliffe wearing glasses and smiling, Natalie Webb in center wearing black and white checkered blazer, and Sara Lobkovich on right in blue top. Names are labeled in script font at bottom. Thinkydoers logo appears as speech bubble in top left corner.

Sara Lobkovich
Next

Q2 2025 OKR Forecast: Generative AI, Localization, and Retrospectives with a Panel of OKR Experts