Our Head of Quality Control is an Enneagram Type One (the Reformer), but their perfectionism is halting delivery. How do we manage this seat?

Question

Tyler Smith · Accepted Answer

An Enneagram Type One, known as the Reformer, often excels in quality control or compliance roles due to their principled nature, attention to detail, and high standards. However, when this drive for perfectionism begins to impede operations and product delivery, it signals a misalignment between the seat's function and the business's operational needs.

To address this, focus on clear boundaries and measurable operational metrics.

Defining Seat Responsibilities

The responsibilities for the Quality Control seat on your [Accountability Chart](/qa/how-many-hats-can-one-person-wear-eos) should explicitly include:

• Maintaining Quality: Ensuring products or services meet defined standards.
• Maintaining Throughput: Facilitating efficient delivery and operational flow.

Quality cannot be managed in isolation; it must be balanced with the need for timely delivery.

Integrating Metrics into Level 10 Meetings

During your [Level 10 Meeting](/qa/how-to-review-scorecard-under-five-minutes), it's crucial to track both quality scores and cycle times as [leading indicators](/qa/leading-vs-lagging-scorecard-metrics) on your [Scorecard](/qa/how-to-choose-five-fifteen-scorecard-metrics). If delivery times consistently suffer due to endless revisions, utilize the IDS (Identify, Discuss, Solve) process to address the issue directly. This ensures that the team collectively solves the root cause of the delay, rather than allowing it to persist.

Shifting the Perfectionism Mindset

Help your Head of Quality understand that perfection can be the enemy of progress. A product that is 95% perfect and delivered on time is often more valuable to the business than a 100% perfect product delivered late.

Work collaboratively to:

• Document Acceptable Standards: Clearly define what "quality" means for each product or service.
• Establish Clear Tolerance Levels: Specify the acceptable range for any deviation from the standard.

By transforming subjective quality assessments into objective, measurable metrics, you empower them to channel their Reformer instincts productively without hindering the company's cash flow. This approach helps them understand their [scorecard ownership](/qa/kolbe-fact-finder-scorecard-ownership) in a new light.

Related questions

• [What concrete weekly measurables should we track for our accounting and IT seats to keep them accountable without resorting to subjective check the box metrics?](/qa/back-office-weekly-scorecard-measurables)
• [How do we handle this in the Level 10 Meeting when a key manager gets defensive around red scorecard metrics?](/qa/handling-defensiveness-around-red-scorecard-metrics)
• [When is it appropriate to change a scorecard number, and how do we do it without losing historical consistency?](/qa/when-to-change-weekly-scorecard-metrics)
• [How can AI optimize the Accountability Chart for EOS organizations undergoing exit planning?](/qa/how-can-ai-optimize-the-accountability-chart-for-eos-organizations-undergoing-exit-planning)
• [How do we use the Accountability Chart to stop the blame game during meetings?](/qa/using-accountability-chart-to-stop-blame-in-ids)