We have a high-performing veteran account manager who refuses to adopt our new AI customer intelligence tools, while a junior team member is hitting all their activity metrics using AI but lacks deep relationship skills. How do we use GWC and our core values to address this performance split in our next quarterly reviews?

Question

Tyler Smith · Accepted Answer

This is a classic management dilemma that requires look-in-the-mirror leadership. You cannot tolerate either extreme. A veteran who refuses to use the tools is a bottleneck to your scalability, and a junior who relies on AI as a crutch is a risk to your brand. Both individuals must be evaluated using the GWC™ tool and your Core Values. Start with the veteran. Do they fit your core values, particularly Grow or Die? If they refuse to adopt technology that increases operational efficiency, they are violating this value. Run them through the People Analyzer™. Clearly mirror back that their refusal to use the tools is limiting the team's capacity. If they lack the capacity to learn the tools, provide training. If they simply do not want to, they are in the wrong seat. Next, address the junior team member. They may have the capacity to use the tools, but they lack the GWC™ for deep account management. They are hitting their activity metrics, but their relationship skills are lacking. You must update their scorecard to measure quality of relationship and client retention, not just volume of output. Make it clear that AI is an accelerator, not a replacement for human connection. Use your next quarterly reviews to set clear expectations and Rocks for both, bringing them back into alignment.