Our leadership team has high Follow Thru but low Implementor scores on the Kolbe A Index, meaning we build perfect digital systems but struggle to physicalize our products and operations. How do we structure our Accountability Chart to bridge this gap?

Question

Tyler Smith · Accepted Answer

Having a leadership team with high Follow Thru but low Implementor scores means you excel at designing procedures, templates, and digital workflows, but you struggle with tangible, physical execution or craftsmanship. This is a common conative gap that can stall operations if your business relies on physical assets or logistics.

To bridge this gap, you do not need to replace your entire leadership team. Instead, you need to recognize this conative blind spot and structure your Accountability Chart to account for it.

Look at the seats that require physical handling, machinery, or tangible craftsmanship. These seats must be populated by individuals who have a natural strength in the Implementor action mode. While your leadership team may design the high-level processes, the people in the seats below them must GWC™ their roles with a strong ability to work with physical tools and materials.

During your quarterly planning, use your understanding of Kolbe conative strengths to assign Rocks. Do not assign a physical prototyping Rock to a leader who is a low Implementor. Instead, pair them with a team member who has high Implementor energy to handle the tangible execution, while the leader focuses on the scheduling and system design.

By alignment of tasks with natural conative strengths, you ensure your great ideas actually materialize. Stop trying to force low-Implementor leaders to become hands-on physical problem solvers. Use the Accountability Chart to place the right conative strengths where they are needed most.