Grade for Learning, Not Precision
Hand-wave the OKR score; spend your energy on the retrospective 'why' behind it.
- Difficulty
- Easy
- Time to result
- ~ongoing to results
- Steps
- 3
- Confidence
- 88%
Wodtke's stance on end-of-quarter OKR grading: the number barely matters. Whether you hit 70% or 80% or 0.075, don't build a fake precise measurement system that wastes everyone's time. What matters is why you landed there — the retrospective. This turns each quarter into a compounding learning cycle where knowledge from one focus area carries forward into the next.
Origin
Christina Wodtke's grading philosophy from Radical Focus, positioned against the over-precise scoring cultures that grew up around Google-style OKRs.
Core principles
- 01Make grading secondary to the retrospective — that's where the value is
- 02Don't get fussy or precise; 'hand wave, hand wave, 80%' is fine — what matters is why 80%
- 03A ~70% hit rate on a good stretch goal is healthy; the target should feel uncomfortable but not doomed
- 04Grading a quarter, then asking what got in the way, creates a learning cycle that makes the company constantly smarter
- 05Knowledge compounds: lessons from a quarter on retention aren't lost when you switch to acquisition
How to run it
- 1
Assign a rough grade
At the end of the quarter, quickly score each key result approximately — 'eh, about 80%' — without agonizing over decimals or building elaborate measurement machinery.
Pro tip Even qualitative results (e.g. 'got approved by the product committee') can be hand-graded; precision isn't the point.
Watch out Chasing a fake-accurate scoring system burns hours and never actually becomes accurate.
- 2
Run the retrospective on 'why'
Spend the real energy asking why you got that grade: if you nearly hit it, would two more days have done it? If you were far off, what went wrong?
Pro tip Make the retrospective, not the number, the centerpiece of the quarter-end ritual.
Watch out Skipping straight from grade to next quarter throws away the entire learning value of the cycle.
- 3
Carry the learning into next quarter's bet
Feed what you learned into the next quarter's decision — what to try next, or whether to keep going — so the company builds knowledge continuously even as focus areas rotate.
Pro tip Switching focus (retention to acquisition) doesn't erase what you learned; it accumulates.
Watch out Treating each quarter as a fresh disconnected sprint forfeits the compounding advantage.
In the wild
Wodtke describes focusing on retention for one or two quarters, grading and retrospecting, then moving to acquisition. The knowledge gained about retention isn't discarded — it keeps building, so the company gets smarter and more effective over time.
→ A team that compounds institutional knowledge across quarters rather than repeating the same mistakes, which Wodtke frames as the underappreciated superpower of OKRs.
Common mistakes
Building a precise scoring system
Teams try to make grades exact (0.075 vs 80%) and waste enormous time on a measurement apparatus that's never actually accurate and adds no insight.
Grading without retrospecting
Recording a score and moving on skips the 'why,' which is the only part that produces learning; grading must stay secondary to the retrospective.
Is it for you?
Best for
Teams already running OKRs who get bogged down in scoring debates and want the quarter-end review to actually make them smarter.
Not ideal for
Contexts where precise, auditable measurement is genuinely required (e.g. regulated targets) rather than internal learning.
From the transcript
“Just go ahead and say, "Eh, hand wave, hand wave, 80%." What matters is why 80%”
“make sure your grading is secondary to retrospective is the biggest thing I would say”
“it creates this learning cycle. So, then you can take that information and say, "Next quarter, what should we try next?"”
“you don't forget all the things you learned about retention. No, you're just building knowledge and building knowledge”
From the episode
The ultimate guide to OKRs
Christina Wodtke (Stanford)