Triangulated Key Results
Measure one quarterly objective from three angles — a hard number, a squishy quality metric, and a dollar figure.
- Difficulty
- Moderate
- Time to result
- ~weeks to results
- Steps
- 4
- Confidence
- 92%
Wodtke's rule of thumb for writing the measurable half of an OKR. Keep the structure simple — one inspiring objective plus about three key results — and pick those three so they triangulate the outcome from different directions: a hardcore quantitative metric, a softer quality/delight signal, and something with a dollar sign. The generating question for every key result is 'how do we know?'
Origin
Christina Wodtke's practical formulation of the Objectives and Key Results method (Radical Focus).
Core principles
- 01Simple beats complicated: every over-engineered OKR methodology gets caught up in rules and forgets what you're actually trying to do
- 02Three key results triangulate an outcome — a hard number, a quality signal, and a money signal
- 03'How do we know?' is the question that converts an objective into key results
- 04Almost everything can be measured well enough to be useful, even if not precisely
- 05Brainstorm every possible way to measure an outcome — the weird late ideas often hold the best insights
How to run it
- 1
Write one inspiring objective
State the quarterly objective as a proper, motivating goal — something that makes you wake up thinking 'I'm doing something really cool' — not a fluffy platitude and not a boring 'ship this thing.'
Pro tip Don't over-wordsmith; you can burn hours polishing language that doesn't change the meaning.
Watch out Too fluffy and it has no meaning; too boring and it inspires nobody — both are failure modes.
- 2
Ask 'how do we know?'
For the objective, repeatedly ask how you would know you succeeded. Each honest answer points at a measurable result — user testing, a landing-page signup rate, a technical build proving feasibility.
Pro tip Spend a full ~10 minutes brainstorming every conceivable measure; obvious ones come first, then you dry up, then the genuinely useful weird ones appear.
Watch out If you stop at the first obvious metric you miss the insight-rich measures.
- 3
Pick three that triangulate
Choose roughly three key results that hit the outcome from different angles: one hardcore number, one squishier quality or delight measure, and one with a dollar sign.
Pro tip For a product launch that's often money made, reach/adoption, and a delight metric (Metacritic, survey, or NPS).
Watch out Don't add key results just to look thorough; three that genuinely triangulate beat a long list.
- 4
Set an uncomfortable-but-not-doomed target
Calibrate each target so it feels a bit uncomfortable but achievable — roughly a 70% expected hit rate — so the goal is motivating rather than either trivial or demoralizing.
Pro tip The point of estimating is to get good at estimating; it's a learned business skill, not black magic.
Watch out A goal that feels doomed is demotivating, not stretching — back off if the team feels hopeless.
In the wild
Walking through a worked example, Wodtke set a Q1 objective of 'creating profiles of people's passions' to shift browsers into members. Asking 'how do we know?', she landed on triangulating key results: roughly 30% of the audience converting to profiles, a weekly-active-users number (liking ~3 products a week), and a qualitative signal from customer panels held every two weeks.
→ A concrete, testable OKR set emerged from an abstract strategy in a single conversation, with clear numbers plus a qualitative check to validate whether users actually liked it.
Common mistakes
Objectives that are too fluffy or too boring
Fluffy objectives carry no meaning and boring ones ('ship this thing') inspire no one; a good objective is motivating but not ridiculous.
Writing tasks instead of outcomes as key results
Key results constantly degrade into task lists; the test is whether the item represents a real outcome the team can move toward, not a to-do checked off.
Is it for you?
Best for
Product managers and teams writing their first OKRs who default to either vague aspirations or flat task lists and need a simple structure that stays honest.
Not ideal for
Teams that want a heavily numerical, precise scoring system for everything — Wodtke deliberately keeps measurement approximate.
From the transcript
“I like three. I think about it as triangulating”
“I always like something that's like really hardcore numbers, I like something that's a little squishier, you know, like uh quality”
“I usually like something that involves a dollar sign”
“then you get to ask my favorite question "How do we know?"”
“With key results, I always recommend spending like 10 minutes brainstorming every single way you could possibly measure that outcome”
“a good goal is one that makes you feel somewhat uncomfortable, but not doomed”
From the episode
The ultimate guide to OKRs
Christina Wodtke (Stanford)