Loading...
Loading...
OKRs specify outcomes but not meaning. Idea-native architecture treats intent as a governable object. One sets targets; the other preserves purpose.
Set measurable targets. Assume purpose is known. Metrics become goals through Goodhart's Law.
Teams hit OKRs while organizations drift from purpose.
Treat meaning as governable. Make intent explicit and protected. Metrics serve purpose, not replace it.
Purpose persists through personnel and metric changes.
| Dimension | OKRs | Idea-Native |
|---|---|---|
| What it specifies | Outcomes and metrics | Meaning and intent |
| Relationship to purpose | Assumes purpose is known and stable | Treats purpose as governable object |
| Drift vulnerability | High (metrics become goals) | Low (intent is explicit and protected) |
| Time horizon | Quarterly/annual cycles | Institutional lifespan |
| Gaming vulnerability | High (Goodhart's Law) | Low (meaning can't be gamed) |
OKRs specify outcomes but not meaning. Over time, the metrics become the goal (Goodhart's Law), and the original purpose drifts. Teams hit their OKRs while the organization loses its way.
Idea-Native Architecture treats meaning itself as a first-class governable object. It makes organizational intent explicit, protects it from drift, and ensures that all activities—including metrics—serve the underlying purpose.
Yes. OKRs can be useful tools within an idea-native framework. But OKRs need purpose to serve; idea-native architecture provides that foundation and prevents the metrics from displacing it.