Alignment with OKRs works best when leadership defines direction and teams co-create their own goals, instead of receiving cascaded, top‑down OKRs.
Problem with traditional OKRs
- Top‑down cascading turns execution into command‑and‑control, so teams feel like executors, not owners, which kills motivation and real alignment.
- By the time cascaded OKRs reach teams, context often changed, so they execute on outdated or misaligned goals, leading to compliance instead of impact.
Team OKR and inverse triangle
- In the Team OKR model, leadership sets vision and strategy, but teams interpret that context and define their own OKRs for the cycle.
- The “inverse triangle” means strategy points the way, while teams at the base lift the organization by committing to outcomes they helped shape.
Why co‑creation matters
- When teams co-create OKRs, they understand why the goal matters, define how they will contribute, and naturally build commitment.
- This co‑ownership leads to better focus, faster execution, and stronger engagement than mechanically cascading OKRs down the hierarchy.
Practical implication for leaders
- Use strategy to set clear direction and context, then run a process where teams propose and refine their own OKRs rather than receiving pre‑packaged ones.
- Treat OKRs as a living conversation with teams, not a checklist, so alignment grows from commitment, not from instruction.