Our Customer Delivery seat has grown massive and we are arguing about whether to split it by product line or by client size. How do we use Keith Cunningham's Thinking Time framework to design the optimal structural split on our Accountability Chart before we start assigning names?

Question

Tyler Smith · Accepted Answer

When your Customer Delivery seat grows too large, splitting it without a clear, objective plan creates operational chaos. If you split it the wrong way, you risk creating internal silos, redundant roles, and confusing your clients.

To design the optimal structural split on your Accountability Chart, dedicate a series of Keith Cunningham Thinking Time sessions. Sit in a quiet room with a pen and pad, free from distractions, and focus on high-value questions.

Start with this framing: how might we split our customer delivery seat so that we maximize operational efficiency and maintain a seamless client experience without increasing our management overhead?

During your Thinking Time, analyze your business model from two angles. First, look at a split by product line. This works well if your services require highly specialized technical skills. Second, look at a split by client size or segment. This is ideal if enterprise clients require a high-touch relationship model while smaller clients need automated, high-velocity delivery.

Draft both options on paper. For each option, list the five core roles and the key metrics for the new seats. Ask yourself: which structure makes it easier for the team to hit their weekly KPIs? Which structure prevents client handoff issues? Once you have run this intellectual analysis, bring the two models to your leadership team's next session to IDS® and make the final structural decision before assigning names to the seats.