Yeah, sadly this feels broken at the moment....at least the way I want it to function.
Example: Goal - Subgoal - Metric and updating the Metric will update the Subgoal but not the Goal.
So if my Goal is not connected to a Metric there is no progress visible ( just 0 percent ) and no way to set the Progress...unless directly linking to a metric and that's not the usecase I have.
I would like to see the All goals will have a progress roll up by default. work and overwrite Sub-goals will no longer contribute to the progress. so that they by default get the roll up.
This is a good and very welcomed improvement. Something I'm missing is that is that it missing the connection of cascading and laddering where a top level KR can be a teams Objective. Like explained in measure what matters. that https://www.whatmatters.com/okrs-explained/top-down-okrs-cascading Will there be a way to handle this? progress rolling up from sub-goal objectives would be a very nice way to capture the total image of how the objective is doing. Then the objective could have a mix of KRs that has direct success measures and as well have child objectives that is that objectives KR.
Still experimenting with this. Just crossposting something I discovered when combining Confluence Databases with Goals. It allows a more smooth interaction for updating Goals. (And contains a feature request :))
Atlassian Team members are employees working across the company in a wide variety of roles.
January 5, 2026 edited
Hi, Nicola here from the Atlassian team. Thanks for trying out Goal types and Success measures, and for all the feedback you’ve shared so far.
A few of you have asked for the ability to roll up progress from sub-goals, not just Success measures. I’d love to speak with customers who need this so we can better understand your setup and reporting needs. You can book a short call with me here.
If the times don’t work, it’d still be great to hear from you. In particular:
How you structure goals today (e.g. Objective → sub-goals → Success measures)
When you’d expect progress to roll up from sub-goals vs Success measures
How you’d expect roll-up to work when you have both sub-goals and Success measures in your hierarchy (e.g. weighted averages)
Thanks again for helping us shape where Goal types and Success measures go next!
I would love to try this out, however, I am not seeing the success measures feature yet, Is it a configuration issue or the feature is not available to all users yet?
I would also like to know if the ability to have different permission levels for goals and success measures is already available. In our case it is critical to be able to determine who has access to specific goals.
This is great -- we're already adopting success measures and metrics. However, I don't understand how I can view all of the target values for all of my success measures in 1 view -- is this possible? It looks like i have to hover here to see the target values. LMK if I'm missing something -- or is there a workaround to see/pull all targets in 1 place?
@Nicola Sunon top of my previous comment, I wanted to share some additional needs we're encountering as we scale our use of Goals and Success Measures.
Goal Types & Filtering
We have a strong need to be able to change the Goal Types on existing goals and the ability to filter by Goal Type in the Goal Directory and plans. We currently have things marked as OKRs that are not actually OKRs since it was the only goal type available at the time (same with generic Goals from before). This will continue to be a need as our goal structure evolves.
Goal Directory Improvements
The Goal Directory would benefit from expand all/collapse all and column ordering functions (on top of being able to pull in the Goal Type column for filtering).
Metrics & Success Measures
We're running into two significant challenges with how metrics work:
First, most goals track progress from 0-100%. Having this as a built-in default metric would save time and reduce clutter in the metrics list, rather than creating a new custom metric for each goal.
Second, we're concerned about metric cleanup and long-term management. Currently, every goal instance creates a new metric entry, even when measuring the same thing (e.g., "% complete" or "revenue"). This makes the metrics list grow unmanageably fast. We need either:
A way to reuse metric definitions without sharing actual values between unrelated goals, OR
Better tools to archive/manage old metrics/goals/projects so the list stays usable
Additionally, it would be helpful to have more control over target types - whether you want to reach a target, stay above some metric, stay below some metric, or stay between values. And parent goal status many times needs to automatically update when success measures or sub-goals change (along with progress and other automations).
Are there best practices documentation available around managing metrics long-term?
Additional High-Priority Needs
There are several other features we're waiting on that would significantly help adoption:
Goal privacy & management controls:
Ability to make goals private and remove followers/contributors as owners/admins at any time
Community Comment on Goal Privacy- even allowing private goal creation (like you can with projects) would be a helpful stepping stone
Reporting & notifications:
Reporting/dashboards that measure update dates alongside target dates to monitor who needs to write updates on official goals and how often they are keeping people in the loop
Customizable notification timing and update periods for both Goals and Projects - Update Cadence - ATLAS-38 - people want to set different dates for reminders and digests
Thanks for continuing to engage with the community on these improvements!
Hi @Nicola Sun, I really like the ability to use multiple success measures against a single goal, although I believe that it would have made more sense to associate success measures with projects rather than goals as this would have given us the weekly reminder to update a success measure rather than a monthly reminder.
From that point of view one improvement that we would like to see, would be to:
Allow the update reminder for a success measure to be selectable between weekly or monthly.
In addition, the high priority needs suggested by @Greg D are also high priority needs for us:
However, my mean reason for commenting is the lack of the ability to roll up progress from sub-goals, not just Success measures.
Unfortunately, the times you’re available for a call are the middle of the night for us so I’ll summarise here:
We use goals across multiple departments / teams, so our goal tracking structure has been:
Department (4 departments using goals)
⬇️
Team (2 – 5 Teams)
⬇️
Objective (3-6 Objectives)
⬇️
Projects (1+)
With the previous incarnation of progress measures rolling up from sub-goals we were immediately able to look at progress against the goals at each level.
With the change to success measures rolling up, not sub-goals, we’ve lost that hierarchal view of goals, which has broken our reporting structure.
We expect to be able to roll up sub-goals and success measures, and we’d expect that success measures from a sub-goal would roll up into progress for the sub-goal, and that at the next level up the progress from the sub-goal would just be treated the same way and have the same weight as a success measure under the same goal.
Glad to see there's active development on Goals (fka Atlas)! And very timely release, we are going to roll out annual and T1 OKR tracking via Goals.
Where is the right place to file product bugs? I couldn't file one under Support when selecting Goals.
We need to have a way to configure Goals views (i.e filtered by tags) to split Company, Department and Team level goals. When adding tags to goals, those tags don't seem to persist. And when saving a view, despite the UI disclaimer that it will be visible to everyone in the workspace, the view isn't visible unless shared via a direct link.
Success measures has been rolled out to all users. If you are still unable to see the feature, please raise a support ticket here so we can investigate further.
We are actively working on support permissions for goals and success measures - this includes being able to restrict view and edit access to goals.
Glad to hear you’re using success measures and metrics.
Today, target values are only available via hover - there isn’t currently a single view to see all targets at once on the directory. However, you can see targets for all your success measures on the goal detail view, on the Overview tab.
I’ve captured your feedback in our backlog. Where would you ideally want targets displayed (e.g., on the progress bar, a table/list view)?
Thanks for the additional feedback as you scale your use of Goals and success measures.
1. Goal types and filtering I don’t have concrete timelines to share yet, but changing a goal’s type and filtering by goal type are both on our radar for future support. I’ve logged your feedback in our backlog.
2. Goal directory improvements “Expand all” and column ordering are both highly requested, your input helps us with prioritisation.
3. Metrics Definitely hear your feedback here, we plan to continue evolving metrics so the metrics list remains usable as you scale, including the areas you called out.
4. Goal privacy and management controls We’re actively working on improved permissions, including:
Edit permissions (who can edit)
Private goals (restricted access)
App-level permissions (which groups can create/view/edit, etc.)
We’re currently targeting mid-year for delivering these permission improvements.
5. Reporting and notifications In the Status Updates feed today, you can see a count of goals with no update for the month. Does that meet your reporting need? And yes, custom cadence is also high on our list based on feedback from many customers.
Thanks again, this is very helpful for prioritising what we build next!
Thanks for your feedback, please see my response above for the latest updates on some of the high‑priority items you called out.
On roll-ups, thanks for taking the time to outline your goal hierarchy and what you’re aiming to achieve. I’ve tried to map this out to confirm my understanding. Can you let me know if this matches your expectations, and if not - where does this fall short?
In the diagram, the goals/success measures marked with a pin are the ones that would be included in the roll-up.
I’d love to hear any feedback as you adopt Goals for annual OKR tracking.
Could you please raise a support ticket for the issue you’re encountering where tags don’t persist? I wasn’t able to reproduce the bug on my side, and having a support ticket will help us better understand the issue (e.g., your site details, steps to reproduce) and dig deeper.
For issues or bugs, you can lodge a ticket with our support team: Atlassian Support
Select Technical issues and bugs
Select any app (e.g., Jira or Confluence) on the same site as your Goals and Projects instance
Include “Goals / Projects” in the issue summary so it’s routed to the right team
@Nicola Sun : Nice to see the real customer engagement. I appreciate your list of priorities, we're pretty much agreeing.
I also second the sophistication of metrics.
Lifecycle management. A lot of metrics now seem % of a specific Goal achieved, which seems silly.
Not all metrics are 0-100%. Consider some of my personal KPI
Nr of audit criteria achieved. It's good when it's 95-100%. It's bad if it's low.
Performance parameters of a technical system. It's an open ended Goal. We want to track how it develops, but we don't necessarily have an end goal. We also want to see the number go down over time. These goals have units (Physical SI units), and I'd love to be able to set those.
MTTF, MTTR. (I'd love if SLA stats of Jira Service Desk could be a metric you loop in! It would be a killer feature for some of our service teams.)
(@Everyone who looks at Goal Type filters: This can be temporary solved with tags. That's what we do. You can always add the same tag to the same goal type)
@Nicola Sun thanks for addressing all of those things and hoping you all can move quickly so we can clean up the current Goals as much as possible and potentially scale it for more use-cases.
For the status update reporting, the teams want to get more customized. They essentially want to look by reporting line for which owners still need to write their updates for the month (incentivize updates by everyone and for everyone in every period). They want a lot of customized reporting around the update date along with other metrics (but the essential report is for who is not writing updates within a period and over multiple periods).
From what I have seen, you can only get those counts that you show in the status updates section on things you are personally following and unfortunately it doesn't even show on the customized views that a person has created.
@Nicola Sun : I would be interested in a migration tool or method for old-style goals.
Here's the problem: We have ca 70 running goals from last year. I would like them to actually have metrics. I do NOT want to lose the update history. I can ofc, programmatically recreate it with the new Goals API (much appreciated!), but ideally I'd like to have the correct update dates so I can plot the history.
I fully understand that "creation Date" really should (in normal cases) be an immutable field, but could there be a tool? Or an import function?
We're using Goals to track our OKRs and we're happy to see the improved support for this with the Objectives and Key Results goal types.
One capability that we're missing, which seems to be a core way of structuring multiple levels of OKRs, is the ability to set a Key Result as the parent of an objective. It's currently only possible to set another objective as the parent, but really the team-level goals should be shown as contributing to company level key results.
Without this, it's difficult to get a good picture of what team OKRs are going to be moving which higher level key results forward.
@Nicola Sun thanks for answering all our questions.
Would you please confirm if each key result will require a unique metric? One of my teams would like to reuse a specific metric across various key results.
Today we observed some weird behavior with our key result graph reporting. I'm wondering if it's because the key results were using an existing metric or because the metric at least shared the same name and type (number).
45 comments