Measure What Matters by John Doerr -Introduction

Measure What Matters by John Doerr, a Silicon Valley legend and venture capitalist, serves as an essential handbook for organizations of all sizes, detailing the power and implementation of Objectives and Key Results (OKRs). Drawing on his experience at Intel under Andy Grove and his work with Google, Doerr advocates for OKRs as a “collaborative goal-setting protocol for companies, teams, and individuals” that drives “great execution.” The book highlights four “superpowers” of OKRs: Focus, Alignment, Tracking, and Stretching, complemented by Continuous Performance Management through CFRs (Conversations, Feedback, Recognition).

Larry Page, Google Cofounder and Alphabet CEO, praises OKRs as “a simple process that helps drive varied organizations forward,” attributing Google’s “10x growth, many times over” to their adoption. The core message is that while “ideas are easy,” “execution is everything.”

I. OKRs: The Foundational System Measure What Matters

A. Definition and Core Components

• Objective (WHAT): An objective is “simply WHAT is to be achieved, no more and no less.” Doerr emphasizes that objectives should be “significant, concrete, action oriented, and (ideally) inspirational.” They are a “vaccine against fuzzy thinking—and fuzzy execution.” An objective can be long-lived, rolled over for a year or longer.
• Key Results (HOW): Key Results (KRs) “benchmark and monitor HOW we get to the objective.” They must be “specific and time-bound, aggressive yet realistic.” Crucially, they are “measurable and verifiable.” As Google’s Marissa Mayer famously stated, “It’s not a key result unless it has a number.” KRs evolve as work progresses, and “Once they are all completed, the objective is necessarily achieved.” (If not, the OKR was poorly designed). Each objective should ideally be tied to “five or fewer key results.”

B. Genesis and Evolution (Andy Grove’s Legacy)

• Intel’s Birthplace: John Doerr’s introduction to OKRs came in the 1970s as an engineer at Intel, where Andy Grove, then executive vice president, instilled this system. Grove’s philosophy, rooted in a “real-world affirmation of accomplishment over credentials,” emphasized “what you can do with whatever you know or can acquire and actually accomplish.”
• Distinction from MBOs: Grove’s “iMBOs” (Intel Management by Objectives), which he coined, significantly differed from Peter Drucker’s earlier “management by objectives and self-control” (MBOs). The key distinctions, as outlined by Doerr, are:
• Scope: MBOs focused on “What”; OKRs combine “What and How.”
• Cadence: MBOs were “Annual”; OKRs are “Quarterly or Monthly.”
• Transparency: MBOs were “Private and Siloed”; OKRs are “Public and Transparent.”
• Direction: MBOs were “Top-down”; OKRs are “Bottom-up or Sideways (~50%).”
• Compensation Link: MBOs were “Tied to Compensation”; OKRs are “Mostly Divorced from Compensation.”
• Risk Aversion: MBOs were “Risk Averse”; OKRs are “Aggressive and Aspirational.”
• Grove’s OKR Hygiene: Doerr distills Grove’s practices into key principles:
• Less is more: “A few extremely well-chosen objectives… impart a clear message about what we say ‘yes’ to and what we say ‘no’ to.”
• Set goals from the bottom up: Encourage teams and individuals to create “roughly half of their own OKRs.”
• No dictating: OKRs are a “cooperative social contract.”
• Stay flexible: KRs can be “modified or even discarded mid-cycle” if the climate changes.
• Dare to fail: “Output will tend to be greater… when everybody strives for a level of achievement beyond [their] immediate grasp.”
• A tool, not a weapon: OKRs are “not a legal document upon which to base a performance review” and should be “best kept separate” from bonuses to encourage risk-taking.
• Be patient; be resolute: Full embrace of the system can take “up to four or five quarterly cycles.”

II. The Four OKR Superpowers Measure What Matters

Superpower #1: Focus and Commit to Priorities

• Prioritization: Successful organizations “focus on the handful of initiatives that can make a real difference, deferring less urgent ones.” This requires “disciplined thinking at the top” and leaders who “invest the time and energy to choose what counts.”
• Commitment by Leadership: Leaders “must personally commit to the process” and “model the behavior they expect of others.” John Chambers, Executive Chairman of Cisco, notes that the book “encourages the kind of big, bold bets that can transform an organization.”
• Clarity and Communication: Top-line goals “must be clearly understood throughout the organization.” Leaders need to convey “the why as well as the what,” ensuring people understand how their goals “relate to the mission.” As LinkedIn CEO Jeff Weiner says, “When you are tired of saying it, people are starting to hear it.”
• Measurable Key Results: KRs “are the levers you pull, the marks you hit to achieve the goal.” They typically include “hard numbers for one or more gauges.”
• Cadence and Flexibility: A “quarterly OKR cadence is best suited to keep pace with today’s fast-changing markets.” While clear timeframes intensify focus, OKRs are “inherently works in progress, not commandments chiseled in stone” and can be modified.
• Paired Key Results: To safeguard quality and prevent “one-dimensional OKRs” (like the Ford Pinto example), KRs should be “paired—to measure ‘both effect and counter-effect’.”
• “Less is More”: “Innovation means saying no to one thousand things” (Steve Jobs). The ideal number of quarterly OKRs is “between three and five.” “If we try to focus on everything, we focus on nothing” (Andy Grove). Larry Page advocates to “put more wood behind fewer arrows.”

Superpower #2: Align and Connect for Teamwork Measure What Matters

• Transparency: OKRs are “open and visible to all parts of an organization, to each level of every department.” This transparency “seeds collaboration,” exposes “redundant efforts,” and allows for “critiques and corrections… out in public view.” Jonathan Levin, Dean of Stanford Graduate School of Business, notes that Doerr “explains how transparently setting objectives and defining key results can align organizations and motivate high performance.”
• Vertical Alignment (Cascading): While traditional cascading can lead to “loss of agility,” “lack of flexibility,” and “marginalized contributors,” “in moderation, cascading makes an operation more coherent.” OKRs serve as a “vehicle of choice for vertical alignment,” knitting individual work to larger organizational goals.
• Bottom-Up Goals: Healthy organizations “encourage some goals to emerge from the bottom up.” At Google, “over time our goals all converge because the top OKRs are known and everyone else’s OKRs are visible.” This fosters initiative and a “deeper awareness of what it takes to get there.” An “optimal OKR system frees contributors to set at least some of their own objectives and most or all of their key results.”
• Cross-functional Coordination: OKRs promote “lateral, cross-functional connectivity, peer-to-peer and team-to-team.” Transparent OKRs mean that “people across the whole organization can see what’s going on,” which “kick[s] off virtuous cycles that reinforce your ability to actually get your work done.”

Superpower #3: Track for Accountability Measure What Matters

• Continuous Reassessment: OKRs are “living, breathing organisms” that “can be tracked—and then revised or adapted as circumstances dictate.”
• OKR Management Software: Robust, “dedicated, cloud-based OKR management software” is becoming essential for scalability, providing visibility, driving engagement, promoting networking, and saving time.
• OKR Shepherd: A designated “OKR shepherd” ensures universal adoption and keeps the process on track.
• Regular Check-ins: “Regular check-ins—preferably weekly—are essential to prevent slippage.” Monitoring progress is “more incentivizing than public recognition, monetary inducements, or even achieving the goal itself.”
• Adaptability and Course Correction: OKRs are “guardrails, not chains or blinders.” If a goal “has outlived its usefulness, the best solution may be to drop it.” This allows organizations to “fail fast” and learn from setbacks.
• Wrap-up (Scoring and Reflection): At the end of a cycle, OKRs are evaluated through objective scoring (e.g., Google’s 0.0-1.0 scale: 0.7-1.0 green, 0.4-0.6 yellow, 0.0-0.3 red), subjective self-assessment, and reflection. The goal is “no judgments, only learnings,” helping teams to “improve their ability to reliably hit 1.0 on committed OKRs.”

Superpower #4: Stretch for Amazing Measure What Matters

• Pushing Limits: “OKRs push us far beyond our comfort zones. They lead us to achievements on the border between abilities and dreams.” This is “compulsory” for companies “seeking to live long and prosper.”
• Big Hairy Audacious Goals (BHAGs): Jim Collins’ term for “a huge and daunting goal” that “serves as a unifying focal point of effort, galvanizing people and creating team spirit.”
• “Gospel of 10x”: Google’s philosophy, championed by Larry Page, of aiming for “exponentially aggressive goals.” A “ten percent improvement means that you’re doing the same thing as everybody else. You probably won’t fail spectacularly, but you are guaranteed not to succeed wildly.” This “requires rethinking problems” and accepting a higher rate of “failures—at an average rate of 40 percent—are part of Google’s territory.”
• Committed vs. Aspirational Goals: Google distinguishes between “committed goals” (to be achieved in full, 100%) and “aspirational (or ‘stretch’) goals” (where 60-70% attainment is considered success). This allows for calculated risk-taking.
• Leadership and Attainability: Leaders must convey “the importance of the outcome, and the belief that it’s attainable.”
• Continuous Pursuit: As Andy Grove stated, “the reward of having met one of these challenging goals is that you get to play again.”

III. The New World of Work: OKRs and CFRs Measure What Matters

A. Continuous Performance Management

• Beyond Annual Reviews: Doerr argues that “annual performance reviews are costly, exhausting, and mostly futile.” He advocates for “continuous performance management,” implemented through CFRs:
• Conversations: “Authentic, richly textured exchange between manager and contributor, aimed at driving performance.” These should be regular, frequent, and allow the “subordinate’s meeting, with its agenda and tone set by him” (Andy Grove).
• Feedback: “Bidirectional or networked communication among peers to evaluate progress and guide future improvement.” Feedback should be specific and can be multi-directional (manager-to-employee, employee-to-manager, peer-to-peer).
• Recognition: “Expressions of appreciation to deserving individuals for contributions of all sizes.” It should be frequent, specific, visible, and tied to company goals.
• Divorcing Compensation from OKRs: A crucial step to “unleash ambitious goal setting” is to “Divorce compensation (both raises and bonuses) from OKRs.” When goals are tied to bonuses, employees “start playing defense; they stop stretching for amazing.” Google, for example, makes OKRs “a third or less of performance ratings,” emphasizing “context.”
• Benefits: Continuous performance management “lifts every individual’s achievement,” “works wonders for morale and personal development,” and allows for improvements “throughout the year.”

B. The Importance of Culture Measure What Matters

• Culture as Foundation: “Culture, as the saying goes, eats strategy for breakfast.” It’s “the living expression of its most cherished values and beliefs.” OKRs and CFRs are “natural partners in the quest for operating excellence.”
• Grove’s View on Culture: Andy Grove equated culture with “efficiency,” seeing it as “a set of values and beliefs, as well as familiarity with the way things are done and should be done in a company.” A strong culture means “managers don’t have to suffer the inefficiencies engendered by formal rules.”
• Google’s Project Aristotle: Identified five key factors for standout team performance, with “Structure and clarity” (OKRs) being the first, and the others (Psychological safety, Meaning of work, Dependability, Impact of work) tying directly to CFRs and a healthy culture.
• Accountable Culture: An OKR culture is an “accountable culture.” People are motivated not just by orders but by the transparent importance of their OKR to the company and their colleagues.
• Catalysts and Nourishers: High-motivation cultures combine “Catalysts” (like OKRs, supporting work by setting clear goals, autonomy, resources) and “Nourishers” (like CFRs, acts of interpersonal support, respect, recognition).
• Pulsing: A modern “online snapshot of your workplace culture” through simple, quick surveys to gauge real-time health and address issues proactively.
• “How” We Do Things: Dov Seidman’s philosophy emphasizes that “HOW We Do Anything Means Everything.” Companies that “out-behave” their competition, characterized by “active transparency,” trust, and collaboration, will “outperform them.”
• Culture First: In some cases, cultural work (e.g., addressing issues of accountability and trust) may be needed “before OKRs are implemented.” Lumeris’s story illustrates the need to replace “old-school, autocratic approach” and foster trust before OKRs could effectively take root.
• Bono’s ONE Campaign: Demonstrates how OKRs can “springboard an enriching cultural reset,” specifically shifting from “working on Africa to working in and with Africa” through a focus on transparency and African leadership.

Conclusion Measure What Matters

John Doerr asserts that OKRs are a “potent, proven force for operating excellence.” They are a “launch pad, a point of liftoff for the next wave of entrepreneurs and intrapreneurs.” Combined with CFRs, they create “durable cultures for success and significance,” driving “exponentially greater productivity and innovation throughout society.” The ultimate stretch OKR, as Doerr puts it, is “to empower people to achieve the seemingly impossible together.”

Measure What Matters: A Comprehensive Study Guide

I. Quiz: Short Answer Questions

Answer each question in 2-3 sentences.

1. Define Objective and Key Result.
2. What is the core purpose of OKRs, according to John Doerr?
3. How did Andy Grove’s “iMBOs” differ from Peter Drucker’s original MBOs, particularly regarding their link to compensation?
4. Explain the significance of the “as measured by” (a.m.b.) phrase in OKRs, as introduced by Bill Davidow.
5. Describe one “superpower” of OKRs and how it helps organizations.
6. Why did Larry Page encourage “10x thinking” at Google, rather than aiming for incremental improvements?
7. What is the “Big Rocks Theory” and how did YouTube’s leadership apply it to their OKRs?
8. What is the primary reason John Doerr suggests divorcing compensation from OKR scores?
9. According to the source, what are CFRs (Conversations, Feedback, Recognition) and how do they enhance OKRs?
10. Why did Lumeris need to prioritize culture change before effectively implementing OKRs, despite the system’s inherent benefits?

II. Answer Key

1. Define Objective and Key Result. An Objective is what is to be achieved, serving as a significant, concrete, action-oriented, and ideally inspirational goal. Key Results benchmark and monitor how the objective will be achieved, being specific, time-bound, aggressive yet realistic, and most importantly, measurable and verifiable.
2. What is the core purpose of OKRs, according to John Doerr? John Doerr states that the core purpose of OKRs is to surface primary goals, channel efforts and coordination, and link diverse operations, lending purpose and unity to the entire organization. He emphasizes that “Ideas are easy. Execution is everything,” and OKRs are a sharp-edged tool for world-class execution.
3. How did Andy Grove’s “iMBOs” differ from Peter Drucker’s original MBOs, particularly regarding their link to compensation? Grove’s “iMBOs” (which Doerr calls OKRs) were designed to be quarterly or monthly, public and transparent, and mostly divorced from compensation, encouraging aggressive and aspirational goals. Drucker’s MBOs, by contrast, were often annual, private, siloed, and commonly tied to salaries and bonuses, which could discourage risk-taking.
4. Explain the significance of the “as measured by” (a.m.b.) phrase in OKRs, as introduced by Bill Davidow. The “as measured by” (a.m.b.) phrase, introduced by Bill Davidow, is crucial because it makes the implicit explicit by directly linking objectives to their measurable key results. This ensures that everyone clearly understands how progress will be benchmarked, leaving no room for doubt or argument about whether a key result has been met.
5. Describe one “superpower” of OKRs and how it helps organizations. One superpower of OKRs is “Focus and Commit to Priorities.” This superpower helps organizations by forcing leaders to make hard choices about what truly matters, dispelling confusion by clearly communicating primary goals. This focused approach ensures that efforts are concentrated on vital initiatives, preventing dilution of resources and attention.
6. Why did Larry Page encourage “10x thinking” at Google, rather than aiming for incremental improvements? Larry Page encouraged “10x thinking” because he believed that a 10% improvement meant doing the same thing as everyone else, guaranteeing no wild success. A thousand percent improvement, however, required rethinking problems and exploring technical possibilities, pushing Google to reinvent categories rather than just iterate.
7. What is the “Big Rocks Theory” and how did YouTube’s leadership apply it to their OKRs? The “Big Rocks Theory”, popularized by Stephen Covey, is a metaphor suggesting that the most important things (big rocks) must be prioritized and completed first, as they create space for smaller tasks (pebbles and sand). YouTube’s leadership used this to bring focus to their hundreds of quarterly OKRs, identifying a few top priorities that everyone at the company would align with.
8. What is the primary reason John Doerr suggests divorcing compensation from OKR scores? John Doerr suggests divorcing compensation from OKR scores to encourage risk-taking and prevent “sandbagging,” where employees set easily achievable goals to guarantee bonuses. Separating them allows for more ambitious “stretch” goals and honest self-assessment, preserving initiative and morale within the organization.
9. According to the source, what are CFRs (Conversations, Feedback, Recognition) and how do they enhance OKRs? CFRs stand for Conversations, Feedback, and Recognition. They enhance OKRs by providing the human voice and continuous interaction necessary for effective performance management. CFRs capture the richness of Grove’s method by fostering authentic exchanges, bidirectional communication, and expressions of appreciation, making OKRs a complete delivery system for measuring what matters.
10. Why did Lumeris need to prioritize culture change before effectively implementing OKRs, despite the system’s inherent benefits? Lumeris needed to prioritize culture change because their initial OKR implementation was superficial due to a lack of trust and accountability, and conflicting internal cultures. Andrew Cole noted that “antibodies will be set loose and the body will reject the donor organ of OKRs” if cultural barriers like passive-aggressiveness and a lack of executive buy-in are not first addressed.

III. Essay Format Questions Measure What Matters

1. Analyze the “four superpowers” of OKRs (Focus, Align, Track, Stretch) in detail, providing specific examples from at least two different organizations mentioned in the text for each superpower. Discuss how these superpowers collectively contribute to “operating excellence.”
2. Compare and contrast Andy Grove’s philosophy of management and goal setting with Peter Drucker’s Management By Objectives (MBOs). How did Grove build upon and diverge from Drucker’s ideas, and what were the long-term implications of these differences for the adoption and evolution of OKRs?
3. Discuss the critical role of culture in the successful implementation of OKRs and CFRs. Refer to the experiences of at least two organizations (e.g., Lumeris, Bono’s ONE Campaign, Coursera, Zume Pizza) to illustrate how cultural factors can either facilitate or hinder the adoption and effectiveness of these management systems.
4. Evaluate the concept of “stretch goals” and “10x thinking” as presented in the text, using examples from Google Chrome and YouTube. What are the potential benefits and drawbacks of setting such ambitious objectives, and what strategies do leaders employ to mitigate the risks associated with them?
5. Explain the transition from traditional annual performance reviews to “continuous performance management” incorporating CFRs. Why is this shift considered necessary in the “new world of work,” and how do CFRs (Conversations, Feedback, Recognition) specifically address the shortcomings of older review systems and foster employee engagement and development?

IV. Glossary of Key Terms

• Objectives and Key Results (OKRs): A collaborative goal-setting protocol that helps companies, teams, and individuals set ambitious goals with measurable outcomes.
• Objective: What is to be achieved; a significant, concrete, action-oriented, and ideally inspirational goal.
• Key Results (KRs): Benchmarks and monitors for how an objective will be achieved; they are specific, time-bound, aggressive yet realistic, measurable, and verifiable.
• “As Measured By” (a.m.b.): A phrase that explicitly links an objective to its measurable key results, ensuring clarity and verifiability.
• Superpower #1: Focus and Commit to Priorities: The ability of OKRs to help organizations choose what matters most and dedicate resources to those vital initiatives.
• Superpower #2: Align and Connect for Teamwork: The capacity of transparent OKRs to foster collaboration, link individual goals to broader organizational objectives, and break down silos.
• Superpower #3: Track for Accountability: The systematic monitoring of progress towards OKRs, allowing for real-time adjustments, honest grading, and continuous reassessment.
• Superpower #4: Stretch for Amazing: The motivational aspect of OKRs that pushes individuals and organizations beyond their comfort zones to achieve seemingly impossible or “10x” goals.
• 10x Thinking: A philosophy, particularly emphasized at Google, of aiming for improvements that are ten times better than existing solutions, rather than incremental gains.
• Committed OKRs: Goals that an organization agrees will be achieved, and for which resources and schedules will be adjusted to ensure delivery, typically aiming for 100% attainment.
• Aspirational (Stretch) OKRs: High-risk, ambitious goals that represent how an organization would like the world to look, even without a clear path or all necessary resources initially; success is often considered to be 60-70% attainment.
• Continuous Performance Management: A modern HR approach that replaces traditional annual reviews with ongoing conversations, real-time feedback, and regular recognition.
• Conversations (CFRs): Authentic, ongoing exchanges between managers and contributors aimed at driving performance, discussing goals, and fostering development.
• Feedback (CFRs): Bidirectional or networked communication among peers and managers to evaluate progress, provide specific insights, and guide future improvement.
• Recognition (CFRs): Expressions of appreciation for deserving individuals’ contributions, both large and small, that are frequent, specific, visible, and tied to company goals.
• Management By Objectives (MBOs): A goal-setting principle codified by Peter Drucker in 1954, emphasizing that subordinates should be consulted on company goals for greater commitment. OKRs evolved from and improved upon this concept.
• OKR Shepherd: A designated individual or group responsible for guiding and ensuring the universal adoption and effective functioning of the OKR system within an organization.
• “Big Rocks Theory”: A time management metaphor suggesting that prioritizing the most important tasks (big rocks) first allows for all other, smaller tasks to fit into a given timeframe.
• Transparency: The principle of openly sharing goals, progress, and critiques across all levels and departments of an organization, fostering trust and collaboration.
• Accountability: The responsibility taken by individuals and teams for achieving their stated OKRs, supported by objective data and an environment where learning from failure is encouraged.
• Culture: The shared values, beliefs, and practices that define how things are done within an organization, serving as a critical medium for the successful implementation of OKRs and CFRs.
• Pulsing: An online, real-time method of gathering feedback on workplace culture and employee morale through quick, frequent surveys.

Measure What Matters

Contact Factoring Specialist, Chris Lehnes