We have structured our Accountability Chart for our upcoming scale-up, but I suspect some leadership team members are struggling with a mismatch between their actual conative strengths and their perceived job requirements. How do we use the Kolbe B and Kolbe C indexes to fix this misalignment?

Question

Tyler Smith · Accepted Answer

Many leadership teams struggle with performance issues because an executive is working against their natural conative strengths. While the Kolbe A™ Index measures an individual's hard-wired method of operation, the Kolbe B™ and Kolbe C™ indexes are the diagnostic tools needed to identify and resolve internal friction.

The Kolbe B™ Index measures an individual's self-expectations of their own job performance. When you compare an executive's Kolbe A results with their Kolbe B results, you can immediately identify areas of strain. If a high Quick Start sales director has a Kolbe B that shows they feel pressured to focus heavily on detailed documentation and system management, they are experiencing conative strain. This internal friction leads to burnout and operational inefficiency because they are forcing themselves to work against their natural instincts.

The Kolbe C™ Index defines the actual requirements of a specific seat on the Accountability Chart, as determined by their manager. By comparing the Kolbe A results of an executive with the Kolbe C requirements of their seat, you can objectively evaluate if they have the conative capacity to succeed in that role.

If you discover a significant mismatch, you have two options. You can restructure the seat's responsibilities on the Accountability Chart to better align with the executive's natural strengths, or you can leverage other team members to offset their conative gaps. Using these tools ensures that your leadership team members are not wasting mental energy fighting their natural instincts, allowing them to focus entirely on driving organizational growth.