We have a highly talented operations leader who GWCs their seat but has a very low Follow Thru score on the Kolbe index, meaning they consistently struggle to update their weekly Scorecard numbers on time. How do we support this conative style without letting them off the hook for data accountability?

Question

Tyler Smith · Accepted Answer

Accountability on the Scorecard is non-negotiable, but forcing a leader to work against their natural conative strengths will lead to friction and burnout. A leader who GWC™ (Gets, Wants, has the Capacity) their seat but has a low Follow Thru score on the Kolbe index is naturally wired to be spontaneous and adaptable. They are not built for repetitive, systematic data entry.

To solve this conative friction, do not lower the standard of accountability. Instead, change how the data gets into the Scorecard.

Use these strategies to support their conative style:
- Delegate the administrative task of data gathering and entry to an assistant or a high Follow Thru direct report.
- Use automated software integrations to push the metrics directly from your operational systems to your Scorecard.
- Create a simple, voice-to-text routine where they dictate the numbers to an AI assistant that inputs them automatically.

The leader must still own the metric. They are responsible for the outcome and must explain any red numbers during IDS® in your Level 10 Meeting™. By removing the administrative friction of data entry, you allow them to focus their energy on executing their operational Rocks and managing their team, while still maintaining absolute data integrity.