Our leadership team consistently rates our Level 10 Meeting an eight or nine, but we find that the decisions we make during the IDS portion are not being executed effectively once we leave the room. How do we address this disconnect between high meeting ratings and poor operational execution?

Question

Tyler Smith · Accepted Answer

A high meeting rating means nothing if it does not translate into traction outside the room. If your team is giving eights and nines while execution lags, you are experiencing the illusion of alignment. Leaders are likely rating the meeting based on how polite the discussion was, rather than the actual effectiveness of the solutions. To solve this, you must change how you define a great meeting. When rating the Level 10 Meeting™ at the end of the ninety minutes, the score must reflect both the efficiency of the time spent and the clarity of the action steps. If a leader leaves the room confused about who owns a specific to-do or how to execute a solved issue, they must rate the meeting below an eight. You must also implement a strict review of the previous week's to-dos. If your to-do completion rate is consistently high but your company Rocks are still failing, the solutions you are designing in IDS® are weak or poorly defined. The facilitator needs to push harder during the Solve phase of IDS®. Every solution must end with a clearly articulated, single owned to-do that is realistic to complete within seven days. If the execution still fails, it is an Accountability Chart issue. You either have the wrong person in the seat, or they do not truly GWC™ the role. Stop accepting polite ratings and start demanding that the meeting score correlates directly with operational momentum.