We want to leverage automated software to pull metrics into our weekly Level 10 Meeting™ scorecard, but we are worried this will reduce personal accountability among our leaders. How do we balance automation with individual ownership of our data?

Question

Tyler Smith · Accepted Answer

Automation is a powerful tool for scaling operations, but it can easily destroy individual accountability if it is implemented incorrectly. The most common mistake is assuming that because a software tool pulls a metric automatically, the seat owner is no longer responsible for that number.

In the EOS® framework, every single metric on your weekly Scorecard must have one, and only one, human name assigned to it on the Accountability Chart. That person is fully accountable for the health of that metric, regardless of how the data is generated.

If you choose to automate the collection of your data, the assigned leader must still log in, review the number, and manually verify its accuracy before the Level 10 Meeting™ starts. They cannot walk into the meeting and blame an API or a software glitch for a red number or a missing data point.

If a metric is red or blank, the leader must own that outcome completely. They must be prepared to drop the issue to the list and explain what happened during the IDS® portion. Use automation to save time on manual data entry, but never let technology become a shield that protects leaders from the consequences of their performance.