> should you complete 70% of your goals to 100%? Or should you complete 100% of your goals at 70%? 70% of the key result is supposed to be a good, attainable g

> should you complete 70% of your goals to 100%? Or should you complete 100% of your goals at 70%? 70% of the key result is supposed to be a good, attainable goal, with 100% of the key result being the "stretch" goal. > the response is always, in classic "no true Scotsman" style, "well, you're just not doing OKRs correctly." No, there's a definition of what a KR is. And in my experience, most companies fail to set KRs, instead writing down what amounts to nothing more than a goal as it usually fails to be measurable. (A discrete boolean "we did it, or we didn't do it", isn't a KR. There's no 70% of a boolean. TypeError, operation is not defined for bool.) > I guess my question is: if nobody in the industry does OKRs "correctly", why are we still trying to do them at all? I have no idea. That'd be the bullshit. If you're C-suite, enforce whatever goal-setting framework you want upon your company, but stop trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.