Our top financial analyst is a great core values fit and gets his seat, but our new AI-driven forecasting models require python and advanced data querying that he refuses to learn. He insists he can still do the job manually. How do we evaluate this GWC capacity issue when the manual workload is rapidly becoming unsustainable?

Question

Tyler Smith · Accepted Answer

The GWC tool is an objective filter to determine if someone is in the right seat. The C in GWC stands for Capacity, which includes the physical, emotional, and mental capability to do the job, as well as the necessary skills and education. If your financial analyst refuses to learn the new tools required for your modernized workflows, he no longer has the capacity for the seat as it is defined today. While manual data entry and traditional modeling worked in the past, they are no longer viable if they limit your scalability and slow down your financial reporting. You cannot allow a team member's resistance to technology to hold your operational efficiency hostage. To address this, you must have a direct conversation and clearly explain that the capacity requirement for his seat has changed. This is not a personal attack, but a structural reality. Give him a clear timeline, perhaps thirty to sixty days, to engage in training and begin adopting the new tools. If he is a great core values fit, you should support his learning curve, but if he still refuses to adapt, you must make a hard decision. He is now a right person wrong seat issue. You must find another seat in the organization where his current skills fit, or you must transition him out and hire someone who has the capacity to leverage modern tools.