Our business is undergoing a major software implementation that has temporarily slowed down our daily output. Our operations manager wants to lower their weekly scorecard targets for the next two quarters to reflect this disruption. How do we decide when it is legitimate to adjust scorecard targets versus when a manager is just trying to dodge accountability for a red number?

Question

Tyler Smith · Accepted Answer

Lowering your scorecard targets because of a temporary operational disruption is a dangerous trap that erodes accountability. When a major change like a software implementation slows down your team, your managers will naturally want to lower their targets to make their scorecards look green. You must resist this temptation. Your scorecard targets represent the healthy baseline your business needs to achieve its long-term goals. If you lower your targets every time your team faces a challenge, your scorecard ceases to be an objective truth and becomes a tool for making the team feel comfortable. Instead of lowering the target, keep the target exactly where it is. Let the number go red. A red number is not a personal failure, it is a data point that tells you your current capacity is constrained. During your Level 10 Meeting, use the IDS process to discuss the variance. If the red number is a direct, expected result of the software implementation, the leadership team can acknowledge it and choose not to take corrective action. This keeps the reality of the business visible to everyone. Only adjust a scorecard target if there is a permanent, strategic shift in your business model or capacity. If you must adjust a target, do it with clear alignment from the entire leadership team, never to accommodate temporary operational friction.