We need to split our Operations seat into separate Service Delivery and Quality Assurance seats, but we are struggling to define the exact boundaries. How can we use the conative profiles of our candidates to build these two seats cleanly on our Accountability Chart?

Question

Tyler Smith · Accepted Answer

Splitting Operations is a critical step as you scale, and using conative profiles like the Kolbe Index is the most objective way to draw the line between Service Delivery and Quality Assurance. Conation is how people instinctively act when solving problems, and these two seats require completely different natural strengths.

The Service Delivery seat is about speed, execution, and client management. This seat requires a candidate with a high Quick Start score to handle unexpected client demands and pivot quickly. They also need a strong Follow Thru to keep projects moving but must not get so bogged down in perfection that they miss deadlines.

The Quality Assurance seat, on the other hand, is about standards, precision, and compliance. This seat requires a high Fact-Finder and a high Follow Thru score. This person naturally needs to investigate details, verify data, and ensure that every delivery matches your exact operating procedures.

When you define the roles on your Accountability Chart, write them to match these conative profiles. For Service Delivery, the roles should include meeting client deadlines, resource allocation, and team capacity management. For Quality Assurance, the roles should focus on process auditing, error reduction, and compliance reporting.

By aligning the seats with these specific conative strengths, you ensure that the two leaders will naturally excel in their roles rather than fighting against their natural instincts. This clear division of labor will eliminate the friction between speed and quality, allowing both seats to function at peak efficiency.