Quantive Alternative After WorkBoard

Where Quantive stops

A deep OKR suite, fed by a shallow signal.

Quantive built one of the most complete OKR feature sets in the category, and enterprises adopted it for good reasons. Progress still resolves to percent complete from a check-in, so the tasks and Slack threads underneath the goal stay outside the model.

Quantive, formerly Gtmhub, was one of the more technically capable OKR platforms on the market. Good API coverage, a real integration marketplace, and a data-oriented approach to key results that suited teams with analysts. WorkBoard acquired it in 2025 to consolidate the enterprise OKR market.

Acquisitions in this category follow a familiar pattern. The acquired product is maintained for twelve to eighteen months, then merged into the acquirer's platform. Features get rationalized, pricing is renegotiated, and the roadmap answers to a company you did not choose. The product you bought is rarely the product you have two years later. If you are already re-evaluating, that is the moment to ask whether the replacement should differ structurally rather than cosmetically.

The structural gap

Quantive and WorkBoard share one architectural limitation. Both are goal-tracking layers. They store objectives, collect reported progress, and render dashboards. Neither carries a native work layer, so the effort that should prove whether a goal is being met lives in Jira, Asana, Planner or a spreadsheet. Merging two goal trackers produces a larger goal tracker.

How it broke, every quarter

Check-in day arrives

Owners retype what Jira already knows.

The update slips

A ritual that adds no new information gets dropped.

The dashboard stays green

The last reported number is the only number there is.

The quarter misses

The stall was visible in the work weeks earlier.

What teams consistently praised

Mature, complete enterprise OKR feature set.
Strong alignment and cascading across large orgs.
Long integration list and flexible reporting.
Well understood by consultants and OKR coaches.

Where teams hit the limit

Progress resolves to a percentage from a check-in.
No task-level model beneath the key result.
Acquisition and product consolidation created roadmap uncertainty.
Feature depth increases the cost of keeping data current.

Two models compared

Feature depth does not fix the data source.

Goal-layer modelQuantive and most of the category

Goals live in one system. Work lives in another.
Teams update goals as a reporting exercise.
Integrations move a percentage, not traceable links between effort and outcome.
Dashboards show what teams reported, which is not what happened.
Roadmap direction changed after acquisition.

Work Graph modelVindaris

A roadmap that is not being merged into an acquirer's platform.
A native work layer, not connectors that move key-result values without context.
Published pricing and a free tier, so re-evaluation costs nothing.
Risk detected from task movement rather than dashboard thresholds.
Configuration that does not require an owner to keep it accurate.

Quantive models the objective. It does not model the task.

Quantive, formerly Gtmhub, was the most data-oriented product in the category. Its insight boards and connector marketplace could pull a key-result value from almost anywhere. The architecture treats work as a data source rather than as a modelled object, which is the distinction that survived the acquisition.

Object	Quantive	Vindaris
Central object	The objective, with connected metric feeds	The task, and the edges up to the goal
What a connector moves	A number	Tasks, owners, state and the relationships between them
Behind a key-result value	The query that produced it	The projects and tasks that produced the outcome
Risk signal	A threshold crossed on a reported number	Pace, focus and capacity against plan
Upkeep	An owner maintaining connectors and insight boards	Sync runs itself once the tools are connected

Pulling a number from a warehouse tells you the metric moved. It does not tell you which work moved it, which is the question a quarterly review actually turns on. Vindaris syncs the work itself, so the objective and the delivery are the same graph rather than a metric and its source.

What changes in practice

Five views that keep strategy and execution in sync.

See every goal connected to the work moving it.

Drag and drop your alignment structure. Roll up work progress, KPIs and goals without enforcing any framework syntax.

Alignment Canvas →

Spot risk while there is still time to fix it.

Run heatmaps across teams, goals, KPIs and projects. Save views and get notified when risk levels change, from task movement rather than a reported number.

Vindaris risk heatmap across teams and goals

Combine tasks and projects across your systems.

Sync HubSpot, MS Planner, Google Tasks, Asana and more into one view. Bidirectional sync keeps everything current while teams stay in their own tools.

All integrations →

Everyone knows exactly what matters most.

A clear view of each person's goals, KPIs, projects and tasks. Start the week focused on what is due.

Run reports the way management needs them.

Rank teams, spot risks, compare KPIs to work. AI summaries push updates to Slack, Teams and email.

Moving off Quantive

Bring the OKR tree. Leave the check-in behind.

Existing customers are facing a migration either way. This one ends somewhere with published pricing and a roadmap that is not owned by a competitor.

Export objectives and key results from Quantive

Quantive's API is one of the better ones in the category, so a scripted export of objectives, key results, owners and current values is straightforward. The standard export covers the same ground if you would rather not write code.

Leave the connectors behind

The metric connectors and insight boards do not need recreating. They existed to move numbers into the goal layer; Vindaris syncs the work those numbers describe, so the goal reads from source rather than from a query someone maintains.

Connect the delivery tools

Connect Jira, Asana, Planner, HubSpot or Google. Tasks arrive with owners and projects attached, and the objectives gain a layer underneath them that Quantive never modelled.

Stop budgeting for a platform owner

Quantive's flexibility came with an upkeep cost: someone had to keep the connectors and boards accurate or the data quietly rotted. That role does not transfer, because there is no query layer to maintain.

Feature comparison

Vindaris vs Quantive, feature by feature.

Quantive wins on feature breadth. This table compares what each product knows about the work beneath the key result.

Feature	Vindaris	Quantive
How progress is measured	Read from task-level work and Slack context in the tools your team already uses.	Check-ins, metric connectors and manual updates against stored objectives.
Goal frameworks supported	Framework-agnostic: OKR, KPI, EOS Rocks, OGSM, SMART, Balanced Scorecard, or hybrid.	OKR-first, with KPI tracking layered on top.
Connection to real work	Native work layer with bidirectional sync to HubSpot, Planner, Google, Jira, Asana.	No native work layer. Delivery stays in Jira, Asana, Planner and spreadsheets.
Risk detection	Automatic execution-risk flags from task movement, focus and pace against plan.	Dashboard thresholds on reported numbers, not detection from task movement.
Status reporting	Live views and AI risk summaries pushed to Slack, Teams, and email.	Insight boards and data-warehouse style connectors.
Capacity and bandwidth	Built-in bandwidth and capacity planning.	Not covered.
Ownership model	Single-owner accountability enforced structurally.	Objective owner, with shared key results common in practice.
Free plan	Free forever, including 2 integrations and up to 5 people.	No free tier. Enterprise pricing on quote, now under WorkBoard.
Best fit	Teams leaving an acquired tool who want the next one to be structurally different.	Organizations already committed to the WorkBoard platform and its roadmap.

The category as a whole is compared in the best strategy execution software guide, and the argument underneath it is set out in the strategy execution gap whitepaper.

What it costs

An acquired enterprise contract, or a published price.

Quantive's pricing now sits inside WorkBoard's commercial model, which means quote-based enterprise terms and a renewal conversation with a company you did not originally choose.

Plan	Quantive	Vindaris
Free tier	Free tier withdrawn. Historically available, then discontinued.	Free forever. Up to 5 people, 2 integrations, all core features.
Entry paid plan	Not published. Quoted, now under WorkBoard.	Connect, EUR 10 per user per month. All integrations, unlimited sync.
Upper plan	Not published. Enterprise configurations negotiated.	Pro, EUR 20 per user per month. Unlimited users in one organization.
Published pricing	No. Evaluation begins with a sales conversation.	Yes, on the website. No quote required to evaluate.
Minimum commitment	Annual contract, with renewal terms set post-acquisition.	None. No seat minimum, no annual term, no setup fee.

Vindaris publishes every tier: free forever for up to 5 people, EUR 10 per user per month for Connect, EUR 20 for Pro. No minimum contract, so the evaluation costs nothing but the time.

Free

€0/forever

Best for individual contributors, small teams or startups. No credit card required.

All features (incl. Alignment Canvas, My Priorities, Heatmap, Data Studio & Task Board)
Set up 2 integrations of your choice
Invite up to 4 additional members
5 ad-hoc AI risk summaries per month

Common questions, answered

What happened to Quantive Results?

Quantive, formerly Gtmhub, was acquired by WorkBoard in 2025 as part of a consolidation of the enterprise OKR market. For existing customers this raises the usual acquisition questions: product migration, re-contracting, and a roadmap now controlled by a different company. Many teams treat it as the natural moment to re-evaluate the category rather than the vendor.

What is the best Quantive alternative?

That depends on what you want to fix. If you want another goal tracker, the market has several. If the problem is that goal status has never been trustworthy between check-ins, the answer is a different architecture. Vindaris maps strategy, goals and KPIs down to every project and task, so progress and execution risk come from the work rather than from a reported number.

How is Vindaris different from Quantive and WorkBoard?

Quantive and WorkBoard are goal-tracking layers with connectors that move key-result values from other systems. Vindaris carries a native work layer: projects and tasks live in the same system as the goals, synced bidirectionally with HubSpot, Planner, Google, Jira and Asana. That means a stalled task changes the goal's risk state without anyone reporting it.

Can I migrate from Quantive to Vindaris?

Yes. Export your objectives, key results and KPIs from Quantive and bring them into Vindaris as-is. Vindaris supports OKRs, KPIs, EOS Rocks, OGSM and hybrid structures. Your team keeps using their existing work tools, which Vindaris connects to through bidirectional sync. See vindaris.com/pricing for details.

Quantive tracks percent complete. Not the work behind it.