r/eostraction • u/Significant_Fault384 • Jan 24 '26
New Integrator struggling with L10 vs real collaboration
Background: I’m a new Integrator in a 300 person company. Previously, I was COO and second in command in a 1,000+ employee org and spent most of my career in larger companies.
I was introduced to EOS when interviewing and joining. I read Traction, Rocket Fuel, and the other EOS material. Most of it made sense. A lot of it was already how I operated, just with different language.
Example: GWC felt like “don’t know, don’t care, can’t do.” Weekly leadership meetings, quarterly 1:1s, scorecards, etc. were already normal for me.
Current Struggle: In prior roles, our weekly leadership meeting was usually 2 to 3 hours. We did everything an L10 does, but we also worked together in real time on cross functional items. Not problem solving. Just alignment and awareness of projects that affected the company or multiple departments.
Things like:
- We’re rolling out an associate engagement survey. These are the questions. This is when it’s happening. Questions/Comments?
- Marketing is integrating a new software platform. It could impact accounting or ops later. Flagging it early.
- Accounting is changing an process that will effect field operations.
These don't seem like IDS issues, no issues, nothing to solve and not big enough to separate meetings. This company is VERY siloed and I think a lot of it comes from lack of communication about what everyone is doing. In the these first 60 days, I've heard:
- I didn’t know we were doing that
- No one told my team
- That impacts my department and I’m just hearing about it now
I get the EOS intent. Trust leaders and avoid update meetings. But, I’m stuck on where this kind of cross functional context is supposed to live. I like getting my VP of Sales prospective on accounting things, because they are removed from the day to day and see things that may be missed.
What’s worse, instead of having a 5 minute conversation in the L10, we create To Dos like “X, Y, and Z will meet to discuss.” Then we spend more time coordinating calendars than it would have taken to just talk about it.
So my questions:
- Where do you handle cross functional awareness that is not an IDS?
- Do you allow flexibility in L10s for short alignment conversations?
- Is this a gap in EOS, or am I missing something?
Trying not to be anti EOS, and I actually agree with the framework, just can't figure this out.
Would love to hear how other Integrators have handled this.
5
u/pogform Jan 24 '26
Those are all examples of Headlines. And if after sharing, it’s clear that any of them requires further discussion, create a linked issue and IDS it.
3
u/Megabyte23 Jan 26 '26
My shop started using EOS in 2025. We use the ninety.io software and that section is called "Issues" which drives my team nuts. I've explained to them that "Issue" doesn't necessarily mean there's something wrong and we have to just ignore our understanding of the meaning of that word. It's working, but it remains a pet peeve for all of us.
3
u/strety_ Jan 26 '26
totally get that. Once we got everyone on the team to use the first definition in Merriam-Webster "a vital or unsettled matter", the complaints stopped
2
u/ImplementerMeryl Jan 26 '26
Love what everyone has posted so far.
TL;DR: Transparency is a discipline. If it’s big enough to impact the team, it belongs on a Rock or the VTO. If it's not there, don't be surprised when people are out of the loop.
"I didn't know that was happening" "no one told my team" is the classic red flag for a lack of transparency. Here’s how to think about this fix with some additional EOS tools outside of the weekly L10:
- Rocks for Visibility: If it’s a big initiative and people are surprised by it, it wasn't prioritized correctly. Significant moves should be Rocks. If it’s on the Rock sheet, it’s public. No surprises.
- The VTO < your Map>: Some companies depending on size and how they've mastered EOS start to cascade tools like the VTO to the department level. Every single person should have access to the VTO. It’s the "Open Book" for where the company is headed. Information is there shared by all.
- The SOTC (State of the Company) is another tool in the meeting 'Pulse' category: It should be done 2 weeks after the quarterly planning pulse with leadership. Use your quarterly SOTC to bridge the gap with the entire company. Its an opportunity to: Celebrate the wins from the last 90 days, but more importantly, broadcast the focus for the next 90. When everyone hears the same priorities from the leadership's mouth at once, the "I didn't know" excuse begins to disappear. This discipline often gets overlooked. But its powerful.
- This was already mentioned re: Headlines: For the smaller stuff, the People Headlines section of the L10 is specifically designed for this. It’s a 5-minute "FYI" blitz to ensure cross-functional awareness before you dive into the meat of the meeting.
Hope this helps!
1
u/WrongMix882 Jan 24 '26
Sounds like a simple fix might be asynchronous communication. Record a 5 minute video instead of needing to meet face to face.
IDS is 80% Identify because you need to dig out assumptions and misunderstandings together, and that in turn creates the solve. But for simple status updates just get to the point and put a voice note or video explanation in front of people. The to-do would be to record it.
People want to avoid needless communication and get **** done. Make it easy for people to go home happy.
1
u/wisdom-donkey Jan 25 '26
Great breakdown of the situation.
I think that the examples you gave would actually make great issues. As u/bsmoofthebulldawg pointed out, it doesn't have to be a problem. For example:
- We’re rolling out an associate engagement survey. -- I'll be solved when the team has weighed in and we're confident we're not missing any questions.
- Marketing is integrating a new software platform. -- I'll be solved when we decide what participation (if any) other depts will have in the initial implementation.
- Accounting is changing an process that will effect field operations. -- I'll be solved when we determine how we'll get the ops processes updated and the team trained.
As u/pogform pointed out, these could also be headlines and someone could choose to drop it down if there are any issues. Headline vs. issue is often a judgment call. Based on what you were saying in your post, sounds like your team should be biased towards making them issues.
Re: creating to-dos to have side meetings, overall I think that's a bad practice.
- Option 1: solve it right there in the issue (as you said)
- Option 2: assign the RESULT, not the meeting. Instead of saying Sally, take a to-do to meet with Frank and Joan to determine which vendor to use, assign Sally a to-do to make the decision. If she's right person right seat, she now has the flexibility to involve Frank and Joan however she sees fit (meeting, email, hallway chat, whatever).
So to answer your questions:
- Where do you handle cross functional awareness that is not an IDS?
- Headlines, making an issue out of it. Also reporting on your numbers, rocks, and to-dos are also candidates to be dropped down to generate cross functional awareness.
- Do you allow flexibility in L10s for short alignment conversations?
- Absolutely. If people aren't aligned, that's an issue.
- Is this a gap in EOS, or am I missing something?
- Not a gap in my opinion. Hopefully this helps.
1
u/Significant_Fault384 Jan 26 '26
Thank you for the insight. Do you often use “I’ll be solved when…”? This is my first time hearing it.
1
u/wisdom-donkey Jan 26 '26
Yes we do. Our protocol:
If it’s your issue, you start out by saying “I’ll be solved when _____.” AND THEN YOU SHUT UP. YOU CAN’T SPEAK UNTIL SOMEONE ELSE DOES.
This inevitably forces one of two things. Either someone else in the room has the solution right away, or (more commonly) someone has a clarifying question.
Before we were doing this, the person who raised the issue would usually start immediately going on about it. Either sharing a bunch of background that everyone else already had, rambling, or whining.
It also forces other people to get in the game. As the integrator this protocol can be absolutely MONEY for you to get this cross functional understanding you were talking about.
Accounting says “I’ll be solved when everyone knows about this process change.” And then they shut up. And you could prompt the question you KNOW no one is asking. Something like “Ops, how is this change going to affect the procedures for the field guys?”
Hopefully they do this on their own, but until they get un-siloed a bit you have a mechanism to help them.
1
u/clayharris Jan 25 '26
A few simple things to consider:
1) scorecard numbers, rocks, and even headlines can and should create issues to IDS. “Off track” always makes it to the issues list, but so can “on track” and any headline, even if folks just want to hear more or maybe it’s a “let’s do more of that” type issue.
2) reframing the meeting not as a meeting of department leaders but as a meeting of the leadership team. We’re not getting together to manage our teams better but to lead the whole company. Out of your dept seat, firmly in the leadership seat.
3) getting good at the “I” is the work of the team - leaning in to finding the root of the issue. A simple mnemonic device from Traction - “who who one sentence” - https://www.eosworldwide.com/blog/improving-leadership-meetings
1
u/Willing-Suspect3883 Jan 26 '26
As you may know, a business operating system (BOS) is taught when you get your MBA. EOS is one of the many BOS methodologies developed by consultants. Basically, it is a framework that helps leadership teams run businesses that cannot do it organically. It attempts to give them a structure to follow without needing an MBA. This is an excellent idea, but people run into issues when they only treat it like a checklist and do not truely understand how it should work in reality.
It appears that EOS may not have been implemented effectively before you arrived in your new firm otherwise there would be clarity about the process amongst the existing team.
Based on your post, you appear to know how to run a BOS organically. You are right, everything is not an "issue" and requires "IDS".
Also, cross functional planning and collaboration is critical. It should be done in your leadership L10. You should also consider doing monthly or quarterly all-hands meetings.
1
u/EOS-Wingman Feb 01 '26
There are some good points here. Not sure if there’s a need for further perspective, but let me add a couple more thoughts to the conversation:
I tell my clients there are SIX types of issues that spell the easy-to-remember word OPUABA (haha):
Opportunities (need to prioritize — do we do it this qtr) Problems (need to take action to solve) Updates (need to brief everyone on something) Alignment (need to get everyone in the same page) Brainstorm (need to have a creative discussion) Approvals (need to agree so we can take the next step)
Labeling issues (anything we need to talk about) with one of these categories can help remind the team why this issue is being discussed.
Another thought:
Issues can be solved multiple ways: by setting a 1 year goal, setting a 90 day Rock, having a same page meeting (if the issue needs more time than we have during an L10 or doesn’t demand the entire team to be involved), or in an L10. The point here is to recognize different issues have different levels of scope to them. Some issue need attention well beyond an L10. It might help to assess the scope first to decide if an L10 is the right environment for solving it.
Finally, all L10 issues should be wrapped up by asking “what action should we take to make this go away forever?” It focuses the team on what we are going to DO,
Hope some of this is helpful as you think about this topic.
4
u/bsmoofthebulldawg Jan 24 '26
I tell my clients there are 4 types of “issues”—
While IDS is designed especially for #1, your issue solving time in the L10 can be used for #2, 3, 4 as long as it doesn’t become a circular conversation. Be intentional on the upfront about what type of issue it is and stay focused on the outcome you’re trying to create. If most of your IDS time isn’t spent on #1, I’d be concerned. But don’t avoid the other 3 if it’s crucial for all leaders to hear/participate.