If you’ve ever set weights on subgoals / key results in Teamflect and thought:
“Okay, these should work like OKR weights… they should add up to 100%…”
…and then the parent goal’s progress didn’t behave the way you expected, you’re not crazy.
In Teamflect today, subgoal “weight” is not a percent of the parent goal. It behaves like a multiplier / factor that says: “When we roll subgoals up into the parent, how strongly should this subgoal influence the parent compared to the other subgoals?”
So it’s relative (A compared to B), not absolute (must sum to 100).
1) Two different “weights” that people mix up
A) Parent goal weight = a real weight (portfolio weighting)
This is the kind of weight people expect.
It answers:
“How important is Goal A compared to Goal B?”
Example:
Goal A weight = 70
Goal B weight = 30
If both are 50% complete, Goal A “matters more” in any roll-up above them.
B) Subgoal weight = a contribution factor (multiplier)
This answers:
“Inside this parent goal, which subgoal should influence the parent more?”
Think of it like volume knobs:
Subgoal weight 2 = “turn this one up louder”
Subgoal weight 1 = normal
Important: It’s not “2%” or “200%”. It’s “twice as influential.”
2) The simplest mental model: “votes”
Imagine each subgoal gets a number of votes based on its weight.
Weight 1 = 1 vote
Weight 2 = 2 votes
Weight 3 = 3 votes
Then Teamflect uses those votes to decide how much each subgoal affects the parent’s progress. More votes = more influence.
3) Step-by-step example
You have a parent goal with 2 subgoals:
Subgoal A: 100% done, weight = 1
Subgoal B: 0% done, weight = 2
Step 1: Add up the weights Total = 1 + 2 = 3
Step 2: Convert weights into “share of influence”
A’s share = 1/3
B’s share = 2/3
Step 3: Calculate parent progress Parent ≈ (100% × 1/3) + (0% × 2/3)
Parent ≈ 33%
What this means plainly
Even though Subgoal A is fully done, Subgoal B counts twice as much, so the parent goal won’t move much until Subgoal B starts progressing.
4) Why “must sum to 100%” doesn’t apply
If you enter:
Subgoal A weight = 60
Subgoal B weight = 40
You might think:
“Perfect, that’s 60% and 40%.”
But Teamflect treats it like a ratio, not a % rule:
60:40 is the same as 6:4
which is the same as 3:2
which is the same as 300:200
So these behave basically the same:
(60, 40)
(3, 2)
(300, 200)
Because only the relationship matters, not the total.
5) “So what should I do in real life?”
If you want one subgoal to matter more than another…
Use small factor numbers and treat them like ratios:
“KR1 should matter 3x more than KR3”
KR1 = 3
KR3 = 1
“KR1 and KR2 should be equal”
KR1 = 1
KR2 = 1
If your organization expects strict OKR-style 100% weights…
Then today, Teamflect subgoal weights may feel unintuitive, because:
they’re not validated like percentages
they don’t need to total 100
values >100 aren’t “invalid” (they just create big multipliers)
In that world, you can still mimic OKR weights by using ratios (e.g., 30/50/20 can become 3/5/2).
TL;DR
In Teamflect today, subgoal weights are contribution factors (multipliers) used in the parent roll-up - only the ratio between subgoals matters; they’re not percentage allocations that must add up to 100.