Beyond basic 'Gets It, Wants It, Capacity to Do It,' how can personality assessments deepen EOS GWC™ evaluations to enhance leader-to-leader synergy within the Accountability Chart?

Question

Tyler Smith · Accepted Answer

The EOS GWC™ (Gets It, Wants It, Capacity to Do It) framework is fundamental for ensuring the right individuals are in the right roles. However, relying solely on a basic application of GWC™ can lead to overlooking critical nuances essential for robust leader-to-leader synergy. Personality assessments offer a powerful layer of insight, transforming GWC™ evaluations into tools for profound team alignment and enhanced synergy.

Enhancing 'Gets It' with Personality Insights

While "Gets It" typically refers to intellectual comprehension, personality assessments expand this understanding by revealing how individuals naturally process information.

• A Kolbe A with a high Fact Finder score, for instance, approaches and processes information differently than someone with a high Quick Start score.
• A DISC profile indicating high Conscientiousness (C) will likely "get" and prioritize details, whereas an Influence (I) profile will focus more on the big picture and people dynamics.

Understanding these inherent processing styles helps ensure that job responsibilities are not just intellectually understood, but also align with a leader's natural cognitive strengths. This integration is key to [optimizing seat design within the Accountability Chart](/qa/how-to-leverage-personality-data-for-eos-seat-design).

Deepening 'Wants It' through Motivation and Passion

"Wants It" delves into a leader's motivation and passion for a role. Personality assessments provide significant depth here:

• StrengthsFinder themes like Achiever or Relator illuminate what people intrinsically want to achieve and how they prefer to engage.
• A leader with the Includer theme might "want it" more when their role fosters team cohesion, while a Maximizer would be more motivated by opportunities to elevate performance and strive for excellence.

Ignoring these intrinsic drivers can lead to misinterpretations of a leader's true "Wants It" factor, potentially resulting in disengagement or underperformance.

Refining 'Capacity to Do It' with Behavioral Alignment

"Capacity to Do It" encompasses skills, available time, and crucial mental makeup. This is where personality assessments provide predictive insights:

• The Kolbe A assessment is particularly valuable here, as it reveals a leader's natural mode of operation. For example, does a leader's propensity for a high Quick Start align with the dominant modus operandi required by the seat's accountabilities, or does it require more Follow Thru?
• A role demanding meticulous adherence to processes might be a constant struggle for someone with low Follow Thru, despite their intellectual capabilities or skills. This often impacts [leader-to-leader use guides](/qa/what-are-leader-to-leader-use-guides-and-how-do-they-leverage-personality-assessments-to-optimize-an-eos-accountability-chart-for-team-effectiveness).

By integrating these personality insights into GWC™ discussions for every leader on the Accountability Chart, organizations can achieve a deeper, more predictive evaluation. This not only places the right people in the right seats but also ensures they possess the complementary behavioral and cognitive traits needed for optimal leader-to-leader synergy, proactive problem-solving, and superior collective performance. Such integration can also help [diagnose and resolve bottlenecks](/qa/diagnosing-accountability-chart-bottlenecks-personality-gaps) that stem from behavioral mismatches rather than skill deficiencies.

Related questions

• [How do personality assessments (Kolbe A, DISC, StrengthsFinder, Culture Index) optimize EOS 'Gets It, Wants It, Capacity' (GWC) evaluations within the Accountability Chart framework?](/qa/how-do-personality-assessments-optimize-eos-gwc-evaluations)
• [How do personality assessments inform Accountability Chart design for remote and hybrid EOS teams?](/qa/how-do-personality-assessments-inform-accountability-chart-design-for-remote-teams)
• [How does the Kolbe A Index assessment specifically enhance the definition and functional placement of roles within an EOS Accountability Chart for optimal team performance?](/qa/how-does-kolbe-a-assessment-enhance-eos-accountability-chart-roles)
• [How can personality assessment data (Kolbe, DISC, StrengthsFinder) be used to proactively resolve cross-departmental friction within an EOS operating system?](/qa/using-personality-data-to-resolve-cross-departmental-friction-in-eos)
• [Which personality assessments (Kolbe A, DISC, StrengthsFinder, Culture Index) are most suitable for precise EOS seat design and ensuring ideal GWC for specific roles within the Accountability Chart?](/qa/comparing-personality-assessment-suitability-eos-seat-design)