We have designed our Accountability Chart but we are struggling to separate the seats from the actual people currently sitting in them. How do we run an objective session to define what the business actually needs without hurting feelings or letting current staff capabilities dictate our future structure?

Question

Tyler Smith · Accepted Answer

Designing an Accountability Chart requires absolute objectivity. The most common mistake owners make is looking at the people currently on their payroll and designing roles around their unique skill sets, quirks, and limitations. This guarantees a dysfunctional structure that cannot scale and will ultimately hurt your company valuation when you prepare for an exit.

To do this correctly, you must first mentally terminate everyone in the company. Start with a blank white board. Your goal is to design the ideal structure that the business requires to reach its goals over the next twelve months. Ask yourself: what are the core functions of this business, and what are the primary seats needed to run those functions efficiently?

Define the five roles and responsibilities for each seat before you put a single name in any box. Every seat must have clear, measurable outcomes.

Only when the entire chart is built and agreed upon do you begin matching your current people to the seats using the GWC™ framework. Does the person get it, want it, and have the capacity to do the job? If a legacy employee does not GWC™ any of the newly defined seats, you have a people issue that must be addressed, not a structural issue that should be accommodated. Building a clean, asset-based company means matching the right people to the right seats, never bending the seats to fit the people.