We have an employee who scores one hundred percent on our core values but fails the GWC for their current operations seat, and we have no other open seats on our Accountability Chart. Do we have to let them go?

Question

Tyler Smith · Accepted Answer

This is one of the most challenging decisions an owner can face: you have a right person who perfectly embodies your core values, but they are in the wrong seat because they lack the GWC™ (Gets it, Wants it, has the Capacity) for their operational role.

If there are no other open seats on your current Accountability Chart that align with their skills, you cannot keep them in their current position. Maintaining them in a role they are not suited for can have several negative consequences:

• It hurts your team's overall performance.
• It slows down your company's execution.
• It sends a message that performance and accountability do not matter.

First, examine your three-year Accountability Chart to see if any upcoming seats might match their capabilities. If a suitable seat will open in the next few months and your company can financially bridge the gap, you might consider a temporary transition. For example, if you foresee a need for a [specialist seat on your Accountability Chart](/qa/restructuring-seat-for-legacy-leader-hitting-ceiling) that leverages their strengths.

However, if no viable seats are available now or in the near future, you must make the difficult decision to let them go. Keeping a right person in the wrong seat purely out of loyalty is a disservice to both the company and the individual. They are likely experiencing the stress of underperforming, and keeping them in that role prevents them from finding a position where they can truly shine. This situation highlights the importance of matching people to appropriate roles, much like ensuring a [Visionary and Integrator balance their roles](/qa/fixing-passive-integrator-visionary-friction) for effective leadership.

When parting ways, do so with generosity and respect. This approach protects your company culture while upholding your high standards of accountability. It reinforces the principle that while core values are paramount, every team member must also effectively [get, want, and have the capacity](/qa/gwc-vp-finance-exit-capacity-issue) for their specific role.

Related questions

• [How do I know if my business is actually ready for a clean exit, or if I am just burning out and need to fix my internal operations first?](/qa/business-exit-readiness-vs-founder-burnout)
• [One of our top-performing salespeople has been with us for eight years, but they consistently violate our Core Values. Do we keep them for the revenue or fire them to protect the culture?](/qa/handling-top-performers-who-violate-core-values)
• [Our Head of Customer Success is a great culture fit and passes the gets it and wants it tests, but her Kolbe score shows she has a very low Follow Thru and high Quick Start. She keeps starting new client retention initiatives but never completes them. Is this a GWC capacity issue, or can we solve this by restructuring her seat?](/qa/head-customer-success-low-follow-thru-kolbe)
• [Our head of operations is working seventy hours a week and is completely buried in tactical fires, which is stalling our scaling plans. They are a great culture fit and have high GWC for the old business, but they cannot seem to elevate to a strategic leadership role. How do we transition them out of the executive seat without losing them?](/qa/leader-cannot-scale-transition)
• [I am the owner currently sitting in four seats on our Accountability Chart, and since I cannot afford external hires, I want to promote from within. However, none of my current employees fully pass the GWC filter for these leadership seats today. How do I structure a developmental runway on our chart without prematurely giving them seats they are not ready to own?](/qa/internal-promotion-runway-accountability-chart)