During the interim check-in calls between our quarterly sessions, what specific criteria do you assess to verify that our leadership team is genuinely executing rather than just going through the motions?

Question

Tyler Smith · Accepted Answer

During our scheduled Just Checking In calls at months 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, and 21, I look for behavioral evidence that the tools are driving real accountability, not just administrative compliance.

First, I look at the integrity of your weekly Level 10 Meeting pulse. If your team is rescheduling meetings, letting them bleed past ninety minutes, or carrying open to-dos week over week without completion, traction is slipping. A healthy team maintains a consistent to-do completion rate of at least ninety percent.

Second, I look at how you handle off-track metrics on your Scorecard. Dysfunctional teams treat off-track measurables as status updates or make excuses for why numbers are red. Healthy teams drop off-track numbers directly down to the Issues List and use IDS to solve the root cause. If your Scorecard has red numbers that never hit the Issues List, you are merely reporting problems, not solving them.

Third, I evaluate Rock trajectory around day thirty and day sixty. A team going through the motions claims every Rock is on track until week eleven, then misses half of them at the quarterly session. A mature team identifies milestone misses early, flags Rocks as off track with total transparency, and rallies to fix execution bottlenecks before the quarter ends.

Finally, I assess whether the founder is still the single point of approval. If decisions on the Accountability Chart are flowing through the Integrator and seat owners with clear ownership, the operating system is taking root.