Target systems and control:
Translating strategic priorities into targets and making progress manageable.
Goal systems connect strategic priorities with concrete objectives and create a rhythm in which progress, dependencies, and new insights become visible.
A robust goal system clarifies where the organization is focusing its efforts, how different contributions relate to one another, and what results demonstrate whether it is moving closer to its strategic priorities.
We support you in developing a management logic that fits your strategy and your organization. This includes clear objectives, meaningful alignment, and routines for regularly reviewing progress and incorporating new insights.
With OKRs and OGSM, we work with two established approaches that connect strategy with objectives and management in different ways.
A target system must fit the organization.
In a non-binding consultation, we will jointly examine how your strategic priorities and goals interact today, where questions arise regarding control and coordination, and what the next step might be for you.
Different changes raise different questions
OKR and OGSM create a link between strategic direction, concrete goals, and ongoing management. They have different priorities. Under suitable conditions, the two approaches can also be combined. cidpartners already explores this connection in its white paper “OKR meets OGSM”.
OKR
Strategic priorities are translated into qualitative objectives and measurable key results.
Short goal cycles create regular opportunities to review progress, gather insights, and adjust goals as needed.
Goals are made transparent and coordinated between relevant parts of the organization. This makes contributions, overlaps, and dependencies visible. Transparency and coordination are also key elements of the existing cidpartners OKR approach.
The aim is to strengthen focus and alignment, and for the organization to regularly respond to new insights.
OGSM
An overarching objective is linked to measurable goals, strategic thrusts and measures within a common framework.
Strategic direction, specific goals, chosen strategies and metrics are combined in a consistent logic.
OGSM creates a common frame of reference for how strategic decisions, goals, and contributions are interconnected.
The strategic direction and implementation should be structured in a compact manner and linked through clear goals and metrics.
OKR and OGSM at cidpartners
Objectives and Key Results (OKR)
OKR connects strategic priorities with transparent, measurable goals and regular review cycles.
Objectives describe what is to be achieved. Key Results make progress visible through measurable outcomes. Goals are aligned across relevant parts of the organization and regularly reviewed.
This supports focus and alignment within OKR and creates regular opportunities to learn from experiences and further develop goals. You can find a detailed introduction to the framework, roles, cycle, and implementation on the OKR subpage.
With OKR Plus, cidpartners goes beyond a simple methodological introduction. This approach also considers how OKR interacts with strategy, leadership, collaboration, and change.
Objectives, Goals, Strategies and Measures (OGSM)
OGSM combines strategic direction, specific targets, strategic thrusts, and metrics within a common framework.
This makes it clear how an overarching goal relates to concrete strategic decisions and their subsequent management.
OGSM can be helpful when a strategic direction needs to be structured concisely and further specified through goals, strategies, and measures.
The detailed methodology, the structure of an OGSM framework, and its practical application are covered on a separate page.
cidpartners also considers OGSM in conjunction with other approaches. The combination of both frameworks is explicitly addressed in the white paper “OKR meets OGSM.”
When a target system should be rethought
A target system becomes an issue when strategic priorities are not adequately translated into day-to-day management. Typical indicators are where targets exist but provide little guidance for decisions, dependencies remain unclear, or new insights are incorporated into management too late.
Strategic priorities are rarely reflected in day-to-day operations.
The strategy provides direction, but in day-to-day work, it remains unclear which goals and results are particularly important.
A goal system creates the link between strategic priorities and concrete goals. This makes it clearer where different parts of the organization should focus their efforts.
Goals exist side by side, but do not overlap.
Corporate goals, departmental goals, team goals, and ongoing initiatives can each be valuable, yet they can also hinder each other.
A goal system makes dependencies and goal conflicts visible and helps clarify how different goals contribute to shared strategic priorities.
The control system reacts too slowly to new findings.
Goals can lose relevance if market conditions, customer requirements, or other key factors change.
Regular reviews and control cycles provide opportunities to jointly consider progress and new information, and to make targeted adjustments as needed.
What a viable target system must achieve
A framework alone does not guarantee effective management. What matters is how strategy, goals, coordination, responsibilities, and regular reflection are integrated.
Goals need a clear link to the strategy.
A goal system provides little guidance if goals are primarily derived from existing tasks.
Therefore, we first clarify which strategic priorities the goal system should support.
A goal becomes strategically relevant when it is clear which priority it contributes to and what result it is intended to achieve.
This creates a link between strategy, goal system, and day-to-day operations.
Fewer priorities create more controllability.
If every task is formulated as a goal, the goal system loses its focusing effect.
Goals should clearly show where attention and resources are primarily directed during a specific period.
This also includes deciding which topics do not currently receive additional priority. This creates focus without transferring the entire operational business into the goal system.
Alignment arises from aligning on goals and dependencies.
Strategic goals cannot always be broken down completely from top to bottom.
Dependencies exist between business units, departments, functions, and teams. At the same time, relevant knowledge often arises closer to the market, with customers, or in day-to-day operations.
Therefore, we connect the strategic direction with relevant perspectives from across the organization.
Alignment occurs when different goals demonstrably contribute to shared strategic priorities and the dependencies between them are clarified.
The existing cidpartners OKR approach also operates with transparency, coordination, and a back-and-forth principle between different levels of the organization.
Measurability requires the right metrics.
Not every readily available metric is helpful in managing strategic goals.
Metrics should reveal whether a relevant result is developing and whether core assumptions remain valid.
To achieve this, we differentiate between activities, results, and long-term impact. This makes it clear whether progress is being made or whether tasks are merely being completed.
Goal conflicts belong in the control process.
Several goals can be individually valid yet still compete for the same resources.
A goal system should make such tensions visible. Which goals are interdependent? Where are the same resources needed? Which priority influences another?
Strategic management creates a framework in which such goal conflicts can be regularly assessed and priorities clarified as needed.
Control needs a rhythm.
Goals lose their value if they are formulated and only revisited many months later.
Regular reviews reveal how results are developing, what obstacles are arising, and which assumptions should be re-evaluated.
The appropriate frequency depends on the framework and the organization. With OKRs, short goal cycles, regular alignment, and reflection are fundamental to the approach.
The goal system must be linked to existing processes.
A new framework creates additional work if strategy, portfolio, budget, and target processes continue unchanged in parallel.
Therefore, we examine the interfaces: Which existing processes will remain? What can be combined? Where do duplicate decisions or contradictory routines arise?
This broader perspective is particularly relevant for cidpartners when it comes to OKRs. OKR Plus combines work on the target system with questions about strategy, leadership, collaboration, and change.
Target systems and control in practice
Rethinking target systems and control
Rethinking target systems and control:
OKR meets OGSM
OKR meets portfolio management
Objectives and Key Results (OKR)
Strategy topics at a glance
Frequently Asked Questions
What is a target system?
A target system links strategic priorities with concrete goals and makes visible how different goals and contributions are interconnected.
It also creates a regular framework in which progress can be reviewed and new insights incorporated into further decisions.
Why do companies need target systems?
A strategy provides direction and priorities. For ongoing management, it is also essential to clarify which results are particularly important within a specific timeframe and how different contributions interact.
A target system creates this connection and makes dependencies and conflicting objectives more visible.
What does strategic management mean?
Strategic management regularly considers progress in relation to strategic priorities.
This involves examining how different goals are developing, identifying dependencies or conflicts of objectives, and determining which new insights should influence further decisions.
How do you link strategy and objectives?
Objectives should be developed from strategic priorities and clearly demonstrate their contribution to the chosen direction.
This doesn’t mean every operational task needs to be translated into a strategic objective. A goal system focuses on the results that are most relevant to the current strategic priorities.
What does alignment mean in a target system?
Alignment means that the goals of different parts of the organization are aligned with common strategic priorities and relevant dependencies are coordinated.
Business units, departments, or teams may pursue different goals.
Alignment occurs when these goals align and it becomes clear where contributions depend on one another.
How do you identify conflicting objectives?
Goal conflicts become apparent when multiple goals compete for the same resources, require different decisions, or their desired outcomes mutually influence each other.
A goal system creates transparency regarding these dependencies and provides regular opportunities to clarify priorities.
What is the difference between strategy implementation and target systems?
Strategy implementation clarifies which decisions, contributions, and initiatives follow from strategic priorities.
Target systems translate strategic priorities into concrete goals and create a regular management framework for progress and alignment.
Both tasks are intertwined.
What is the difference between OKRs and OGSM?
OKR works with Objectives and Key Results and utilizes regular goal cycles, alignment, and reviews.
OGSM combines Objectives, Goals, Strategies, and Measures in a coherent strategic management logic.
Which approach is most suitable depends on the connection an organization needs between strategy, goals, and ongoing management.
When is OKR appropriate?
OKRs can be useful when strategic priorities need to be translated into a regular goal-setting and learning cycle, and when transparency and alignment between different parts of the organization are important.
This approach is particularly suitable for organizations that want to regularly review goals and promptly incorporate new insights into their management.
When is OGSM appropriate?
OGSM can be useful when a strategic direction needs to be concisely linked to concrete goals, strategies, and measures.
This approach creates a consistent structure between the overarching objective and the elements through which its implementation is tracked.
Can OKRs and OGSM be combined?
Yes. Both frameworks can be combined under suitable conditions.
cidpartners has explored this connection in their white paper “OKR meets OGSM.” Among other things, it discusses how both approaches can be combined and adapted to an organization’s requirements.
Is OKR just a method for setting objectives?
OKR encompasses goal setting, transparency, alignment, and regular reflection.
The existing cidpartners approach describes fixed communication and alignment formats, regular cycles, and the connection between strategic and operational topics as key components.
What is OKR Plus?
OKR Plus is a cidpartners approach that considers the introduction and use of OKRs within a broader organizational context.
In addition to the actual goal system, interfaces with strategy, leadership, collaboration, and change are also taken into account.
How do you prevent a target system from becoming a parallel process?
The target system should be aligned with existing strategy, portfolio, budget, and management processes.
Therefore, before implementation, it should be clarified which routines will remain in place, which can be combined, and where duplicate planning or conflicting control logics would arise.
How often should strategic objectives be reviewed?
The appropriate frequency depends on the objective system and the organization’s context.
For OKRs, short cycles and regular check-ins are fundamental. Other management approaches can operate with longer time horizons.
The crucial point is to review objectives regularly enough to allow relevant changes to inform further decisions.
What happens if a strategic goal is not achieved?
First, it should be clarified why the deviation occurred.
Perhaps measures were unsuitable, resources were lacking, or dependencies were underestimated. Similarly, an assumption on which the objective was based may have changed.
The deviation thus provides information for further management. It should not automatically lead to a change in the strategic direction.