One specific leader on our team consistently misses their weekly To-Do completion target, dragging our overall team metric down, but they argue their seat is too unpredictable for the ninety percent standard. How do we address this individual performance gap without creating a double standard?

Question

Tyler Smith · Accepted Answer

In EOS®, we hold a hard line on the ninety percent weekly To-Do completion standard because weekly execution is the lifeblood of traction. When one leader consistently falls short and blames the unpredictable nature of their seat, they are demonstrating a lack of GWC™, specifically in capacity or capability. The first step is to call out the behavior, not just the metric. During your next weekly Level 10 Meeting™, do not let the red metric pass without dropping it to the Issues List. Address the root cause directly during IDS®. Ask the leader if they truly have the capacity for the seat as structured on the Accountability Chart, or if they are simply over-committing during the meeting. Often, chronic under-completion is a symptom of poor prioritization or a failure to delegate. The leader might be agreeing to too many tasks during IDS® because they want to appear helpful, rather than push back. Have them practice saying no or delegating the action items during the meeting itself. If the seat is truly unpredictable, they must learn to build a buffer into their schedule. If the pattern persists after coaching, you have a People Component issue. You must evaluate if they fit your Core Values and truly GWC™ the seat. Allowing one leader to consistently miss the ninety percent target while everyone else meets it breeds deep resentment and destroys the accountability culture of the entire leadership team. Set a thirty day trial period for them to hit ninety percent, and hold them to it.