Our departmental Level 10 Meetings™ are escalating almost every single issue up to the leadership team because middle managers are afraid to make decisions. How do we use the Accountability Chart and the GWC™ filter to force them to solve issues at their level?

Question

Tyler Smith · Accepted Answer

When middle managers consistently escalate issues to the leadership team, it signals a lack of accountability and a fear of ownership. This upward delegation creates a significant bottleneck for you as the owner and hinders your organization's ability to scale.

To effectively halt this trend, you must rigorously enforce the Accountability Chart and the GWC™ filter.

Enforcing the Accountability Chart and GWC™

When an issue is brought to the leadership team's short-term issues list, your Integrator must immediately ask a critical question: "Why couldn't the departmental team solve this themselves?"

Sending Issues Back Down

• If an issue clearly falls within a department head's accountabilities, it must be sent back down to their level.
• Clearly communicate that they possess both the authority and the responsibility to resolve problems within their defined domain.
• If a manager lacks the confidence or the skill to address issues in their seat, they may not GWC™ (Get it, Want it, Capacity to do it) their seat. This is a fundamental talent issue that requires your direct attention. For more on ensuring the right people are in the right seats, consider topics like [analyzing Kolbe Indexes with AI for project teams](/qa/analyze-kolbe-indexes-with-ai-project-teams) or [how to delegate four seats using Kolbe](/qa/how-to-delegate-four-seats-using-kolbe).

Coaching and IDS® Sessions

• Utilize these moments as crucial coaching opportunities.
• Guide your managers on how to conduct effective IDS® (Identify, Discuss, Solve) sessions within their own departmental meetings.
• The goal is for managers to understand that escalating an issue is not an escape route. Once this realization sets in, they will begin taking ownership of their problems. This process is key to preventing the "blame game" often seen in meetings, as discussed in [using the Accountability Chart to stop blame in IDS](/qa/using-accountability-chart-to-stop-blame-in-ids).
• Freeing your leadership team from day-to-day operational issues allows them to focus on company-wide growth initiatives and strategic [exit readiness](/qa/business-exit-readiness-vs-founder-burnout).

The Role of AI

AI never participates directly in the meeting room. Instead, its function is supportive:

• Before the Level 10 Meeting: AI can assist in preparing data and insights.
• After the Level 10 Meeting: AI can help capture and track decisions, ensuring follow-through.

Related questions

• [When is it appropriate to change a scorecard number, and how do we do it without losing historical consistency?](/qa/when-to-change-weekly-scorecard-metrics)
• [How do we use the Accountability Chart to stop the blame game during meetings?](/qa/using-accountability-chart-to-stop-blame-in-ids)
• [How do we resolve seat overlapping issues?](/qa/resolving-accountability-chart-seat-overlaps)
• [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)
• [Should we create a dedicated AI Operations seat on our Accountability Chart, or integrate AI into existing seats?](/qa/ai-operations-seat-accountability-chart)