OKRs and Project Management
Partners in Driving Real Results
In the world of organizational management, tools like OKRs (Objectives and Key Results) and project management often get pitted against each other. But as we'll explore, they're not rivals—they're allies. Let's dive into how they differ, when to use each, and how to combine them for maximum impact.
A Common Misconception
I heard this from someone in senior management at a state public body: “Our institution has always worked based on deliverables, so project management is our management tool.”
In other words, he was saying that OKRs aren’t relevant for them, because they already use project management.
The problem with this way of thinking is that project management focuses on deliverables, and deliverables aren’t a guarantee of results. And at the end of the day, what we want are results, not just deliverables.
“But what if we also have a BI dashboard with KPIs? Does that mean we’re doing results management, right?”
Yes, without a doubt. But as we’ve seen, indicator-based management and OKRs have different functions. KPIs are indicators of business health, meaning they’re tracked to know if the organisation is doing well. OKRs are for implementing a change, which could be correcting one or more indicators that are also part of the KPIs.
But back to the issue of Project Management + KPIs to replace OKRs, the problem is that a KPI system is a separate entity from the project; they don’t talk to each other.
It’s unlikely anyone will check the BI to see if a project is producing results. And even if you create a link between them, they remain two independently centralised systems, managed by different specialists.
Practice shows that this combination doesn’t work well for communicating and tracking strategic priorities among an organisation’s teams.
The truth is that both OKRs and Project Management are powerful management tools, but they operate at different levels and with distinct purposes. Far from being mutually exclusive, they can form a strategic alliance when understood and applied correctly.
Fundamental Differences
Let’s recap the fundamental differences between the two:
OKRs focus on results and generated impact. They aim to achieve Objectives evidenced by measuring results, comparing measurements before and after.
Projects focus on efforts and deliverables. They aim to organise sequences of efforts so that a specific deliverable is produced.
As we’ve seen more than once in this book, OKRs are the GPS, the Waze that records the final destination and shows you during the journey if you’re on the right path to get there.
Projects are one way to organise the efforts in an attempt to reach the desired destination.
I remember when I discovered Project Management, I was fascinated and wanted to apply the methodology to everything that needed managing, even in my personal life. But I soon abandoned many of the projects I built, because Project Management has a cost, and it’s not low. A project managed in traditional models like PMBOK or PRINCE2 is laborious both to build and to change or track.
Project Management works well for complex deliverables with predictable and interdependent stages, and when you need to track resources at each stage, like people, equipment, and finances. The process is all formal and centralised, and requires people with specific training.
If you’re going to build a building, you’ll need project management. It’s a typical example where all the prerequisites fit: The stages are well-known, predictable, and must happen in a pre-determined sequence. Detailed tracking of time and resources planned and spent at each stage is necessary. And in the end, what matters is that the deliverable (the finished building) happened within the original specifications, and within the planned timeframe and costs.
Combining the Two
Straight to the point for using OKRs and Projects:
Create OKRs first.
To create the action plans that will progress the KRs, first consider simpler alternatives, like task lists, Kanban, or Scrum.
Only use project management under a KR if it’s really necessary. Use the criteria we’ve seen in this chapter to make that decision.
Not every project needs to be under an OKR.
For Example
Suppose the following scenario: a county education department built the following OKR for the next 4 years:
✅ Objective: Increase the quality of basic education to reduce social inequalities and expand students’ future opportunities.
KR 1 - Increase the percentage meeting expected standard of combined reading, writing, and maths from 62% to 75%.
KR 2 - Reduce annual school dropout rate from 8% to 3%.
Suppose reducing annual school dropout rate from 8% to 3%., which is the desired result with KR 2, will require initiatives like:
Creating an individualised monitoring system for students at risk of dropout.
Building a support network between school, family, and social assistance.
Implementing transport and meal bursaries for vulnerable students.
Monthly monitoring of cases for quick intervention.
Considering the complexity of each of these initiatives, they could be the stages of a project aimed at reducing annual school dropout rate.
A project here is desirable because dropout is a multifaceted problem requiring coordination between different actors (schools, departments, families, community). It’s not simple actions, but a set of initiatives organised in phases, with allocated resources, intermediate targets, and centralised tracking.
The project to be created would sit “under” KR 2, and would be its action plan.
Not Every Project Needs to Be Linked to an OKR
Remember that OKRs serve to generate focus on a limited number of priorities, and trying to force the connection of all an organisation’s projects to OKRs works against the framework’s main purpose.
Projects that usually don’t need to be linked to an OKR include:
Focus on technical or operational delivery: System maintenance projects or infrastructure updates that don’t generate a direct strategic impact.
Regulatory or compliance obligations: Projects that need to be done by legal requirement, whose main success criterion is completion within timeframe and scope.
Low-impact internal projects: Internal process improvements or departmental initiatives that don’t move the organisation’s strategic needles.
An Agile Alternative: Milestones as Microprojects
Over time, organisations that mature in OKR use realise that not everything needs to become a project. Many initiatives can be tracked more simply, using that specific type of KR we’ve seen: the Milestone.
Remember that this type of KR describes a deliverable, not a result. For example: “Conduct a user survey to understand main pain points”. Although it’s a deliverable, it was included in the OKR as a milestone, a fundamental step towards achieving a bigger Objective.
To track a Milestone-type KR, we don’t always need to create the full structure of a project, which as we’ve seen, is complex and costly. Instead, we can use something similar but ultra-simplified. Create a small table detailing the stages and the percentage contribution of each, like in the example below:
KR 3 - Conduct a user survey to understand main pain points.
Action Plan for the KR:
Action Plan for the Key Result 3
The percentages in each stage indicate the progress that will be considered in the KR when that stage is completed.
On completing stage 1, the owner updates the KR progress to 20%. On completing stage 2, updates to 40%, and so on. This method is built in minutes, and tracking is simple and straightforward. It’s a good alternative when we don’t need the full project management apparatus.
Conclusion: Partners, Not Rivals
OKRs and project management aren’t competitors, but partners with complementary functions.
OKRs provide the “why” and the “what”: They define the direction, focus on priorities, and success criteria based on impact.
Project management provides the “how”: It organises resources, tasks, and dependencies to ensure a complex deliverable is completed successfully.
Use project management when predictability is high, dependencies are critical, and resource control is essential.
Link these projects to the KRs they help drive. For simpler initiatives, consider using Milestones for agile, uncomplicated management.
By mastering this alliance, your organisation will be equipped not just to execute plans efficiently, but to ensure that execution generates the results that really matter.
