We have assigned scorecard measurables based purely on Accountability Chart seats, but some managers are consistently struggling to hit their targets. How do we leverage our team's innate talents to help them hit their weekly numbers?

Question

Tyler Smith · Accepted Answer

When assigning scorecard metrics, the Accountability Chart must always be your starting point. However, once you have assigned a number to a specific seat, you can leverage your team's natural talents and patterns of thinking to help them succeed.

If a manager is struggling to hit their weekly number, do not just tell them to work harder. Instead, look at how their innate strengths can be applied to the challenge.

Consider these examples:

• If a sales manager has strong relationship-building talents, they will hit their outbound call targets best through highly personalized, high-touch outreach.
• If another manager has strong analytical talents, they might succeed by systematically targeting specific market segments using data-driven lists. This approach can be particularly effective when paired with tools that help [turn scorecard metrics into proactive tasks](/qa/turn-scorecard-metrics-proactive-ai).

Both individuals are accountable for the same weekly volume metric, but the way they achieve that result should align with their natural strengths. When you coach your team members to leverage their natural talents, they will hit their scorecard targets more consistently and with less effort, resulting in a more productive and highly engaged organization. This often involves understanding individual team members' unique strengths, perhaps through [analyzing their conative profiles](/qa/analyze-kolbe-indexes-with-ai-project-teams).

This approach can also help in situations where team members get defensive about missed targets. For guidance on how to manage these discussions effectively, see [handling defensiveness around red scorecard metrics](/qa/handling-defensiveness-around-red-scorecard-metrics). Understanding individual motivators can even help with [setting realistic weekly goals](/qa/setting-scorecard-targets-without-historical-data) when historical data is scarce.

Related questions

• [How do we review our weekly scorecard in under five minutes?](/qa/how-to-review-scorecard-under-five-minutes)
• [How do we narrow down our massive list of metrics to just five to fifteen numbers?](/qa/how-to-choose-five-fifteen-scorecard-metrics)
• [How can we analyze our team conative profiles or Kolbe Indexes using AI to build a more effective project team for a major operational shift?](/qa/analyze-kolbe-indexes-with-ai-project-teams)
• [Our scorecard is packed with metrics like closed sales and completed projects, but we still feel reactive. How do we shift our focus from lagging results to weekly leading indicators?](/qa/leading-vs-lagging-scorecard-metrics)
• [One of our key managers gets defensive and starts explaining away the context every time their scorecard metric drops into the red. How do we handle this in the Level 10 Meeting?](/qa/handling-defensiveness-around-red-scorecard-metrics)