daddia Draft Objectives
When to use
When candidate objectives need the KR-in-disguise test — qualitative, directional, strategically linked — not numbers wearing objective clothes.
What this skill does not do
- Does not write KRs — route numbers to
/okr:write-key-results. - Does not set targets — route to
/okr:set-targets. - Does not cascade — route to
/okr:cascade.
Preconditions
| Input | If missing |
|---|---|
| Candidate objectives | Ask user to provide |
| Practice profile (cascade level, ceiling) | Default 3–5 per level; flag [PROVISIONAL] |
| Parent strategy or parent KR (if cascaded) | Ask; flag linkage gap if absent |
Provisional mode
Without parent linkage: flag every objective Strategic linkage: none found; do not PASS without connection at cascaded levels.
Trust spine
- Confidence bands (
structured-aggregation):- High: MECE objective set within ceiling; each PASS with linkage.
- Medium: Some vague or KR-in-disguise flags with suggested rewrites.
- Low: Majority metric-laundered or inspirational mush — scaffold only.
- Failure modes:
- Strategic advice vs. support: Verdicts are diagnostic; strategist owns final wording.
- Client confidentiality: Objectives may be pre-release — CONFIDENTIAL header.
- Accountability gap: KR-in-disguise rejected with number relocated, not silently accepted.
- Analytical Rigor: Set-level count and overlap check MECE.
- Incentive Gaming: Guards metric laundering — objectives that are pre-committed metrics or vanity goals dressed as strategy.
- Escalation triggers: Set exceeds ceiling with no deprioritization plan — flag focus risk.
Workflow
- Read practice profile for cascade level and objectives-per-level ceiling.
- For each candidate: would achieving this be good without a number? Reject quantity-in-objective as KR-in-disguise.
- Check strategic linkage to parent KR or org strategy.
- Check count against ceiling — flag set if over.
- Check vague inspirational mush — two people could write unrelated KRs?
- Completeness check before output: set-level overlap assessed.
Output format
CONFIDENCE: [defensible recommendation | structured first pass]
LOAD-BEARING ASSUMPTIONS: [if any]
Objective 1: [text]
Verdict: [PASS | FLAG — KR-in-disguise | FLAG — too vague]
Strategic linkage: [what this connects to, or "none found — flag"]
[repeat per objective]
SET-LEVEL CHECK: [count vs. ceiling; any overlap between objectives]
Worked example
Input: "Increase revenue by 20%"; "Be great at customer experience."
Expected output (excerpt):
Objective 1: Increase revenue by 20%
Verdict: FLAG — KR-in-disguise; suggested objective: Become clear value leader in mid-market segment
Strategic linkage: none stated [review]
Objective 2: Be great at customer experience
Verdict: FLAG — too vague; suggest narrowing to: Reduce onboarding friction for enterprise tier
SET-LEVEL CHECK: 2 objectives — within ceiling; overlap: none
Quality checks before delivering
- KR-in-disguise test on every candidate
- Strategic linkage checked for cascaded levels
- Set count vs. ceiling
- Vague objectives flagged with narrowing suggestions
- Figures source-tagged or omitted
Propose profile update
When a stable convention surfaces during this run (thresholds, naming, tone, output format, or recurring corrections), propose a profile update: show the exact diff against ~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-strategy/okr/CLAUDE.md (org-wide facts go to org-profile.md), ask for confirmation, and write only on yes. Only /okr:practice-setup auto-applies a full profile write.
Outputs
Follows plugin CLAUDE.md § Outputs. Next: write-key-results, cascade, or revise flagged objectives.