A leadership team member has missed their weekly Scorecard measurable for eight consecutive weeks, claiming the target was set unrealistically high during planning. How do we determine whether the target is truly flawed or if the leader lacks GWC for their seat?

Question

Tyler Smith · Accepted Answer

When a measurable stays red for two months, you are not dealing with a bad week; you have an operational breakdown or a leadership failure. Do not leave this unresolved. You determine the root cause through a structured diagnostic process in your Level 10 Meeting™.

First, audit the math and capacity behind the target. Review the assumptions made when the goal was set. Did market conditions shift dramatically, or did available team capacity drop due to an unexpected departure? Calculate what it physically takes to achieve the weekly target. If hitting the number requires forty hours of pure outbound calling from a leader who also manages ten people, the target was mathematically flawed. In that case, reset the measurable to an objective, achievable activity level.

However, if the math confirms the target requires reasonable, disciplined execution, the problem is not the number. It is the person in the seat. Apply the EOS® People Analyzer® to assess whether they GWC™ the role: do they Get it, do they Want it, and do they have the Capacity to do it?

Leaders who lack GWC often blame the Scorecard instead of confronting their execution shortfalls. They claim the target is unfair because admitting accountability exposes their inability to manage time, delegate lower-value work, or lead their department.

If the data proves the target is achievable and the leader continues to miss while deflecting responsibility, the Integrator must address the seat. Running on data removes emotional drama and makes accountability undeniable.