At the end of our weekly Level 10 Meeting, our scores are frequently split down the middle, with some leaders giving a 9 or 10 while others rate the session a 5 or 6. How should the Integrator handle radically divergent meeting ratings?

Question

Tyler Smith · Accepted Answer

Divergent ratings signal that your leadership team has completely different expectations of what an effective Level 10 Meeting looks like. When one person gives a 10 and another gives a 5, you do not ignore the split, but you also do not let it drag the meeting past the 90-minute hard stop.

Follow the rating protocol strictly. When a leader rates the meeting below an 8, the Integrator asks one question: Why? The low rater must state the operational breakdown in one sentence. Acceptable explanations sound like: We spent forty minutes debating a minor metric and never touched our top priority, or We jumped into solving an issue before identifying the root cause. Unacceptable explanations sound like: It just felt off today.

The Integrator does not defend the meeting, explain away the score, or start a thirty-minute post-mortem. Simply record the feedback verbatim in the meeting notes. If someone rated a 10 while another rated a 5, the Integrator should review both perspectives after the meeting ends.

If the divergent scores repeat for two consecutive weeks, place Meeting Ratings at the top of the Issues List for the next Level 10. Spend the first ten minutes of IDS aligning on standards: are we rating the quality of our debate, our adherence to the timebox, or our emotional satisfaction? Once the team agrees on the definition of an 8 or higher, ratings will normalize.