OKRs vs. KPIs… what’s the difference? Do we really need to keep discussing this?
This debate or confusion you might say has been going on for a long time now. But what if the answer is simpler than we think?
Everywhere I look, I see posts and videos comparing the two, but I think these conversations are missing the essential point.
In PuMP’s approach, it doesn’t have to be this complicated with all the overlapping and confusing terminology.
With a simple approach:
There are things we want to improve
There are things we want to stay as is.
What To Do if We Want Improvement
Here’s a 5-step process that we use in PuMP if we want improvement and should be valid no matter which approach you prefer to use:
1. Always Start With the Goal
Every business has goals or objectives – PuMP calls them performance results. These are simply the things you want to improve – the focus of the organization’s strategy.
For example:
We don’t want any customer to have a complaint from our services (because currently we have and it increased recently, and it’s making us lose our customers).
So, the performance result (or goal) we want to achieve could be: We receive no customer complaints.
We want or systems run without any interruptions (so many system failures occur during a week that causes interruptions in our operations, making us lose time and causes waste).
So, the performance result (or goal) we want to achieve could be: Our systems run without any downtime.
2. Design a Meaningful Measure or KPI for the Goal
You design performance measures – which should be the quantitative and objective evidences of those goals results.
For example:
Number of customer complaints per month
% of downtime duration of the systems per week
3. Measure and Learn the Current Performance of the Measures/KPIs to Set Meaningful Targets
You measure your current performance (the baseline performance) and set target values for the performance you want in the future.
For example:
Number of customer complaints per month is currently 20 (varying between 15 and 25). We want to decrease it to 10 customer complaints per month by the end of this year.
% of downtime duration of the systems per week is currently 7% (varying between 2% and 12%). We want to decrease it to 3% per week in 6 months.
4. Understand What Causes the Difference Between the Current and Target Performance
Make root cause analysis to find:
What constrains your system to keep the performance at this current level?
What are problems in the process flow that results in this current performance?
What are the leverage points in the system that if we change, we can reach a higher level of performance?
etc.
5. Select an Improvement Action
You then select and implement improvement actions to close the gap between the current performance and the targeted performance. These are the improvement projects or change initiatives you decide on or actions you take.
For example:
Launch a customer success program to better understand customer needs and redesign related processes to meet those needs.
Upgrade the most problematic modules of our systems
to prevent downtime.
Where do you Want no Improvement but Maintain the Current Performance Level?
And, there are areas where you need stability, not improvement. In those cases, you still measure and you can call them performance measures – but you don’t set targets, you just monitor to make sure performance holds and stays as-is
For example:
You want to quickly respond to your clients and you measure “average monthly response duration” to track it. Its current performance is 1 day, (varying between 0.5 – 1.5 days). You think this is an acceptable duration to respond to a client. So, you can track this measure only to ensure you keep this current performance in control.
And that’s all you need to understand and know!
So in summary, you have performance measures for two different purposes: evidences of your improvement focus and evidences of your business-as-usual stable performance.
The OKR Terminology
Now, let’s look at OKRs:
The “O” (Objectives) are essentially performance results. (like: we receive no customer complaints from our services)
The “KR” (Key Results) are basically performance measures with target values. (like: decrease customer complaints from 20 to 10 in 6 months)
KPIs are for business-as-usual performance.
So, the concepts overlap. The real issue is not whether you choose OKRs or KPIs. The real issue is having a solid measurement methodology behind them and knowing the reason why you measure.
Without a supporting methodology, OKRs can sometimes drift into vague intentions, activity lists, or wishful numbers.
That’s where PuMP makes the difference. PuMP provides that missing ‘how-to’ steps, making OKRs practical, evidence-based, and actionable:
✔️ How to word goals so they’re measurable (instead of mistaking activities for results).
✔️ How to design proper, meaningful and strong measures that become evidences of the goals are met.
✔️ How to make sure you trust the data you collect.
✔️ How to track performance (with tools like XmR charts) to get the truth out of the measures to guide improvement decisions and in the end, prove that you really reach your targets.
And in the end, it is not important what you call what as long as you follow a methodology and you have a glossary that helps everyone understand the same thing from a term.
The Bottom Line
It’s not about KPIs vs. OKRs. It’s about using a measurement process that makes whichever terms you use actually work. The distinction is about “why” you are measuring something:
to guide improvement effort, or
to monitor to ensure current performance remains as-is.
Using a methodology like this will sure ensure OKRs are properly brought to life.
What do you think — are we overcomplicating performance management with terminology instead of focusing on evidence?
Why balancing “business as usual” and “improvement” measures is essential for effective strategy execution
In every organization, there are two kinds of performance at play:
Business as usual — the processes and results we want to sustain at their current (acceptable) level.
Strategic improvement — the goals and results we want to elevate to a new level of performance.
Both are vital.
Yet many organizations treat them the same way — tracking everything together in one overloaded dashboard, blurring what needs attention and what doesn’t.
The result is lost focus and confusion over what truly matters.
Let’s unpack how to separate — and balance — these two types of measures.
1. It Starts with the Goal
Every meaningful measure begins with a goal.
A goal defines whether we want to maintain performance or improve it.
If what we want is to “keep customer satisfaction steady above 90%”, that’s a sustainability level we want to preserve. There is no intention for improvement, but a need to keep an eye on to ensure it doesn’t drop.
If the goal is “increase customer satisfaction from 85% to 90% by next year”, that’s an improvement goal.
It seems subtle, but this distinction changes how we manage, review, and act on measures.
Without this clarity, organizations fall into the trap of trying to “improve everything” — spreading resources thin, creating dashboard overload, and losing strategic focus.That clarity drives how we select, track, and discuss measures.
2. Tracking Measures for the Right Intent
The measure design process is no different for any type of goal we want to achieve.
If we are tracking a measure to see the changes through time, we need XmR charts. Because there is no other tool that will give you the information of what is the true performance of our measures are.
Only the purpose of tracking is different for improvement and business as usual (or backburner) measures.
For example:
Both are important — but their management attention is not the same.
3. Separate the Focus: Different Spaces for Different Conversations
One of the biggest mistakes organizations make is mixing sustainability and improvement measures in the same reports and meetings.
When everything is in one place:
The “business as usual” data crowds out the strategic improvement data.
Managers get caught firefighting stable processes instead of leading real change.
Improvement goals lose visibility and momentum.
To avoid this, it’s helpful to separate reporting and review spaces:
Operational dashboards track sustainability goals — things that must stay healthy and predictable.
Strategic performance reviews focus on improvement goals — the few areas that require deliberate, resourced change.
Or keep the topics separate in a meeting and in reports. Highlight what is on priority focus and what is not.
This separation keeps focus sharp and avoids confusing “watching” with “improving.”
4. When “Business as Usual” Needs Attention
A sustain goal doesn’t mean “ignore it.”
It means “keep an eye on it — but don’t invest improvement effort unless there’s a signal.”
If a sustainability measure shows an unwanted change — for instance, defect rates suddenly rise, or customer satisfaction drops— that’s when the “business as usual” area temporarily moves into improvement focus.
In other words:
“If performance goes off track, it becomes an improvement goal — until stability is restored.”
This flexible approach keeps the organization both stable and adaptive.
5. The Strategic Value of Separation
Distinguishing between sustainability and improvement measures isn’t about adding complexity — it’s about clarifying intent.
It ensures:
Improvement efforts target the right priorities.
Resources are not wasted on already stable areas.
Operational teams know what to monitor.
Leaders can focus reviews on the few goals that truly drive change.
In short, it builds discipline into strategy execution.
The Takeaway
Not every measure should be improved.
Some should simply be sustained — and that’s perfectly healthy.
The art of performance management lies in knowing which is which, and treating them differently.
Together, they form a balanced system — stable where it should be, and improving where it must.
Which of your current KPIs belong to “business as usual” — and which truly represent your organization’s focus for improvement?
Recent Comments