I am the Visionary and I keep greenlighting tactical marketing campaigns directly with our marketing agency, but my Integrator vetoes them because they do not fit the current budget. We are in a constant state of friction over who has the final say on spending. How do we resolve this operational tug-of-war on the Accountability Chart?

Question

Tyler Smith · Accepted Answer

This friction is a classic sign of structural boundary confusion. In the EOS framework, the Visionary and the Integrator must operate in lockstep, but their seats have completely different roles on the Accountability Chart. The Visionary seat is about big ideas, culture, R and D, and key relationships. The Integrator seat is responsible for running the daily business, executing the business plan, and managing the budget. When you bypass your Integrator to greenlight tactical marketing spend, you are violating the integrity of the Accountability Chart. You are acting as an individual contributor or a rogue manager, which undermines your Integrator's authority and confuses your external vendors. To resolve this, you must accept that the Integrator has the final say on operating decisions and resource allocation within the agreed budget. If you want to pursue a new marketing strategy, you must bring it to your same-page meeting or your Level 10 Meeting™. You must pitch the idea and let the Integrator evaluate whether the business has the capacity and the cash to execute it. If the answer is no, the veto stands. Your role is to feed the organization with high-level ideas, while your Integrator's role is to decide which ideas the company can actually digest and execute without choking. Respecting this boundary is the only way to scale the business and build real organizational value.