Thrust From The Bottom -Burn From Both Sides Series Part-2

This article is Part-2 of the two-part series on practical guide to the OKR formulation, planning, and execution process. I would recommend reading the Part-1 before reading this article.

In this article, we will deep dive into the Bottoms-Up planning and how executing it in parallel with the Top-Down (Leadership) OKR planning would help companies/organizations be in lockstep towards achieving the OKR goals faster.

Thrust From The Bottom — Be The Fuel!

As an Execution Partner (Engineers, Marketing Managers, Sales Associate, etc.) or an Execution Partner Lead (Director Of Product, Senior Engineering Manager, Sales Manager, etc.), one has two options

1. Wait & Watch: You restlessly wait for the leadership to complete the OKR planning and communicate the company/organization (Top-Down) OKRs, and scramble to get your group/team OKRs defined before you are deep into the quarter.
2. Be the Fuel: Start the Bottoms-Up OKR planning as per your regular cadence by embracing the ambiguity and accounting for it in the planning process. The ambiguity referred here is the potential alignment / non-alignment of your goals with the company/organization goals.

I would choose option 2, “Be The Fuel” to create “Thrust from the Bottom.” The question is, how do you do it efficiently? Bottoms-Up planning is a five-step process,

Aggregate:

We collect ideas/requests from multiple sources internal and external to the group/team. The end goal of this step is to crowd-source and mine for the most pressing problems to solve on behalf of the customer. The end product of this step is an aggregated list of different things the team can accomplish over the quarter to solve the customer’s problem. Please remember, one needs to over-index on completeness than correctness in this step. The Aggregate step can be facilitated by Program/Product Managers or really anyone.

Sort & Rank:

The aggregate list of things is cleansed, scrubbed for duplicates. Next, the list is refined by grouping them into critical themes called Objectives. Once we have the list of potential objectives, we need to Sort & Rank them in a specific order. The key is to have a Business/Product Prioritization Framework identified/defined to score each Objective. There are multiple frameworks (Example: RICE, KANO, Moscow) that are available, and one can choose the best that works for the respective group/team. The end product of this step is a list of Objectives, sorted/ranked based on a business/product prioritization framework. sorting & ranking should be a team effort and strive for healthy debate and ruthless prioritization on behalf of the customer. The Sort & Rank step can be facilitated by one person, but the inputs should come from the entire stakeholding team (Product Manager, Engineering Manager, UX, Marketing, etc.).

Enhance:

The Objectives ranked by the Business/Product Prioritization Framework have to be enhanced by identifying the perfect Key Results to track and measure the success criteria of the Objectives. The KR definition is a very crucial step that could make or break the whole OKR goal-setting process. Failure to define the right KR could cause the Objective to fail and result in execution chaos. The KR definition can either be done by the Execution Partner Lead and reviewed/approved by the stakeholding team (OR) collaboratively by the stakeholding team in a single session. The end product of this step is a sorted list of Objectives enhanced by the right Key Results identified/documented.

Draw Cut-Line:

Once we have the list of objectives identified, sorted & ranked by a business/product prioritization framework, we need to draw the cut line and identify what is practically feasible to accomplish in the quarter. A critical pre-requisite to drawing the cut-line is to have Projected Available Capacity (PAC) identified and each Objective’s effort estimated. PAC is basically the available resource (engineers, sales, etc.) (hour/days/weeks) after excluding operations, vacation, holidays, etc. to accomplish the Objectives & Key Results. An example template to calculate PAC is available for download here.

Once the PAC is calculated, the next step is to estimate each of the objectives approximately (OR) T-shirt sizing. The T-shirt sizing step can be done before or after the Sort & Ranking step based on the group/team’s preference. There are two different schools of thought; one supports the estimates as a key factor to prioritization and others against it. Once the PAC and the T-shirt Sizes are available, we use both to draw the cut line to the list of Objectives. The end product of this step is a list of objectives sorted by rank and visual indication(cut line) of what qualifies to be executed in the quarter. The Objectives below the cut line are not discarded but used for future OKRs, reprioritization opportunities, and hiring plans. The Draw Cut-line step can be facilitated by one or two-person, depending on the size of the group/team. Person one can facilitate PAC and second Objective T-Shirt Sizing. Both can align post each step and collaborate with the stakeholding team to draw the final cut-line.

Align Up:

The final step is to check the alignment of the group/team(Local) OKRs with the company/organization(Global) OKRs. The Align-up step has a dependency on the Top-Down OKR (company) planning to be completed and officially published. In this step, the Execution Partner Leads (Director Of Product, Senior Engineering Manager, Sales Manager, etc.) and other stakeholders try to align their local OKRs with global OKRs. The plan is adjusted accordingly. There can be a few different scenarios,

1. The Global/Local OKRs align perfectly: No changes are required. Continue to execution. The entire Projected Available Capacity (PAC) will be consumed to accomplish the Global OKRs
2. Global/Local OKRs don’t align: Global OKRs have a direct dependency with a specific group/team but the scope(new) of work required is not captured in the Local OKR. In this case, Global OKR dependencies get natural priority; the Objectives at the bottom of the already sorted by rank list are pushed below the cut-line (as required) to accommodate the work scope required to accomplish Global OKRs. The PAC required to achieve the Global OKR work scope/dependencies will be recycled from the lowest ranking objectives in the local OKRs.
3. Global OKRs don’t have any direct dependencies or effort required: The respective group/team continues to execute as planned to accomplish their group/team OKRs which may help the rest of the company/organization function operationally to achieve the Global OKRs. In addition, they might help achieve Level 2 metrics of the company or contribute towards future company OKRs.

Once the Align-Up step is completed, the Local OKR is communicated within the respective team, and the entire unit moves to the execution phase. The OKR communication & Execution steps are captured elaborately in Part-1.

Summary

To wrap-up, we explained how executing Bottoms-Up OKR planning in parallel with the Top-Down (Leadership) planning would “Be The Fuel” to create “Thrust from the Bottom” in achieving the company/organization goals faster. We also dived deep into the five (Aggregate, Sort & Rank, Enhance, Draw Cut-Line, Align-Up) different phases of the Bottoms-Up planning, and how each of the steps is crucial in aligning the Local & Global goals & execution strategy.

Note: This two-part series on OKR Practical Planning is mostly a reflection of my 15+ years of working in technology companies. These are my personal views and not a representation of the companies I have worked for. I would appreciate your feedback, thoughts, and questions.

If you are an executive/leader looking for help with the OKR process formulation in your startup, happy to help! You can read my article on How to Increase the momentum of your business flywheel by 10x? to help scale your company/organization. Please ping me @ pratheepkrishna@gmail.com or connect me on LinkedIn