Our team misses weekly Scorecard goals for three weeks in a row, hits them for one week, and then misses again. How do we know whether the problem is poor execution or an unrealistic weekly target set during annual planning?

Question

Tyler Smith · Accepted Answer

When a metric flickers between red and green over six to eight weeks, leadership teams often blame the target and lobby to lower the goal. Changing targets without evidence destroys the integrity of your Scorecard. You must use the IDS process in your Level 10 Meeting to diagnose the true root cause before adjusting the baseline.

To determine whether you face an execution failure or an unrealistic goal, run the metric through a four-part diagnostic:
- Capacity reality check: If the team performed at peak efficiency with zero interruptions, does the current staffing level and operational process mathematically allow them to hit the weekly target? If hitting the target requires eighty-hour workweeks or unbroken perfection, the target is flawed.
- Resource and tool consistency: Does the owner have the tools, clear standard operating procedures, and training needed to execute? If the target assumes automation or software that is not fully rolled out, the target is premature.
- Frontline GWC check: Does the person responsible for the daily activity truly Understand it, Want it, and have the Capacity to do it? Execution gaps frequently disguise a people issue.
- Historical correlation: When the target was met in the past, did the company achieve its corresponding revenue, margin, or delivery objectives? If yes, the target is correct and must be protected.

If your diagnostic confirms that the capacity is mathematically impossible, reset the weekly target during your next Quarterly Pulsing session with clear consensus. If the capacity exists and the math works, leave the target alone. The problem is execution discipline, process adherence, or leadership coaching.