OKRs for DCA programmes
Summary. OKRs state programme-level objectives and measurable key results. They complement your Layer 2 SLA and Layer 3 monthly pack: OKRs are not a substitute for contract metrics, but they align executives and operations on outcomes (cash, efficiency, conduct, and controls).
Practical tip: pick one objective and three key results, then trace each key result to a Layer 3 section so you do not run a parallel spreadsheet culture.
OKR vs SLA vs KPI (short)
| Term | Typical use | Example |
|---|---|---|
| OKR | Programme or portfolio outcomes over a quarter or year; a few objectives, a handful of key results. | Reduce 90+ exposure by X% by year end. |
| SLA | Contractual minimums between CP and DCA; breach triggers escalation. | First contact within N business days on Y% of eligible accounts. |
| KPI | Ongoing operational measures; often feed both SLAs and OKRs if definitions match. | Recovery rate, PTP conversion, QA pass rate. |
If the same number appears in an OKR, an SLA, and Layer 3, use one definition of numerator and denominator.
How OKRs relate to governance layers
| Layer | Role of OKRs |
|---|---|
| Policy (1) | Objectives may reflect executive intent (sustainable recoveries, fairness). |
| Contract / SLA (2) | Key results must not contradict SLAs; they may stretch beyond minimums with clear definitions. |
| Monthly pack (3) | Key results should map to pack sections so you score progress without duplicate reporting lines. |
| Issues, cadence, escalation (4 to 6) | Persistent miss on key results triggers governance review. |
Principles
- Few objectives; typically three to five key results per cycle, owned and time-bound.
- Balance recovery metrics with conduct, complaints, hardship, and data quality where policy requires.
- Be explicit what the CP owns versus what the DCA influences.
- Use the same definitions as Layer 3 for recovery rate and cohorts (avoid vanity numerators).
Example objective
Objective: Improve debt collection efficiency and effectiveness while meeting conduct and compliance expectations.
Example key results (pick three to five)
| # | Key result (examples) | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Reduce DSO or equivalent aging measure by X% | Cash velocity. |
| 2 | Increase recovery rate (bank-defined) by X% | Align numerator or denominator with Layer 3. |
| 3 | Decrease 90+ (or policy band) exposure by X% | Flow and early action. |
| 4 | Achieve X% automation or STP for agreed processes | Define scope. |
| 5 | Improve customer or complaint metrics on collection touchpoints by X | Conduct. |
| 6 | Data accuracy or reconciliation breaks below X | Controls. |
| 7 | Implement X champion or challenger or segment tests with documented outcomes | Learning. |
| 8 | X training or certification hours for staff (internal and/or DCA) | Capability. |
| 9 | Reduce open conduct or regulatory issues in scope to X | Risk. |
| 10 | Improve team efficiency (e.g. RPCs, collections per FTE) by X% | Productivity without unsafe pressure. |
Balanced scorecard examples
Use a small set of perspectives so OKRs do not collapse to cash alone:
| Perspective | Example measures | Why include it |
|---|---|---|
| Cash and effectiveness | Recovery rate on definition, cash per placed dollar, vintage curves | Core programme purpose |
| Conduct | Complaints per 1,000 accounts, hardship SLA, QA pass rate | Prevents unsafe pressure tactics |
| Controls | Reconciliation break ageing, recall SLA adherence, data defect rate | Stops silent operational rot |
| Efficiency | Cost to collect, right-party contact rate where defined | Improves marginal economics without hiding conduct |
Anti-patterns
- OKRs that are only cash while policy requires conduct metrics.
- Key results that conflict with written SLAs without a reconciled definition.
- Recovery-rate games (self-reported DCA metrics without CP-side truth).
Cadence
Quarterly review of key results is typical alongside monthly Layer 3 data. Refresh objectives with annual contract and incentive review.
Deep dive: Governance layers · Reporting · Back to pack home