We just created a new Head of Technology seat on our Accountability Chart to oversee our AI integrations, and two of our current leadership team members both want it. It is starting to cause political friction. How do we resolve this?

Question

Tyler Smith · Accepted Answer

When two leaders are competing for the same seat, you must remove politics from the decision by using the objective frameworks of EOS. The selection must be based entirely on who is the best fit for the seat, not who has more tenure or who wants it more.

Start by clearly defining the five roles for the new Head of Technology seat. Be specific about what this seat is accountable for, such as managing technical architecture, implementing AI workflows, and securing data.

Next, evaluate both candidates objectively using the GWC tool. Sit down with each leader individually and run through the three questions. Do they truly get the deep technical demands of the seat? Do they want the daily pressure of managing our technology stack? Do they have the intellectual and emotional capacity to lead this department as we scale?

If one candidate clearly passes the GWC check and the other does not, the decision is made. If both candidates pass the GWC check, look at their Kolbe profiles and behavioral drives. The seat may require a high Follow Through for system security or a high Quick Start for rapid AI deployment.

Choose the person whose conative wiring aligns best with the seat's primary objectives. For the candidate who does not get the seat, have an honest conversation explaining the data-driven decision. Show them how their current seat is vital to the company's success.