X-Model Series: Traction
I’ve sat in a lot of leadership team meetings where the intent was good, the slides were polished, and the discussions were lively — but nothing really moved afterwards.
That’s what traction is about in the X-Model: whether the team actually gets things done and keeps things moving, or whether it all dissolves once the meeting ends.
The execution gap is real
According to Harvard (2022), only around a third of leaders believe their teams consistently follow through on priorities.
We see this in practice a lot. For example, we recently worked with a FTSE 100 client who had launched a bold digital customer strategy. The ambition was there, but six months in, progress reports looked familiar – the same blockers, the same missed handoffs, the same conversations. The strategy was solid, but it hadn’t been translated to action.
This is the execution gap: where effort is high, but progress stalls.
What traction looks like
Katzenbach & Smith described high-performing teams as “disciplined in purpose and performance.” That’s the essence of traction: discipline in how the team delivers.
It shows up in repeatable, observable behaviours:
- Commitments are honoured
At a global consumer business, the executive team began tracking its own promises in a shared dashboard. Every commitment – from major programme decisions to small follow-ups – was visible. Within a quarter, delivery rates rose sharply, not because people worked harder, but because accountability was collective. - Decisions hold
In a growing scale-up, debate was healthy but decisions were repeatedly reopened. The leadership team introduced a principle: once a decision left the room, it was final. Dissent remained welcome during discussion, but implementation was collective. Cycle times on key projects halved. - Daily activity connects to strategy
A professional services firm mapped its weekly leadership priorities against three strategic goals. Anything without a line of sight was paused. Within two months, time spent on non-strategic work dropped by 30%. - Setbacks don’t derail momentum
During COVID, a healthcare leadership team ran rapid reset rituals – short, structured check-ins to assess impact, reprioritise, and reset. Progress continued despite disruption, and the practice endured as a resilience mechanism.
These aren’t sexy, dramatic transformations, but they’re the bread and butter of progress. Over time, they accumulate and create reliability and rhythm.
Why traction slips
Lack of traction is rarely down to laziness or intent. More often it’s because:
- Priorities shift faster than they can be actioned
On the surface, this looks like poor planning. But often it reflects anxiety in the system. When leaders feel exposed to external pressure (market shifts, investor scrutiny, customer demands), they displace that anxiety into the team by repeatedly reshaping priorities. It creates a fantasy of control — “if we change direction, we’re adapting” — but in practice it leaves teams paralysed. - Decisions aren’t translated into clear ownership
This is rarely about forgetfulness. More often, it’s a defence against accountability. In some teams, naming clear owners feels too exposing — it raises the risk of visible failure. So decisions are left vague, or “owned by everyone,” which really means no one. Psychodynamically, it’s a way of avoiding conflict and the discomfort of holding each other to account. - Execution fragments across functions
Fragmentation often reflects unspoken rivalries and territoriality. Functions protect their own priorities and resist alignment because aligning means giving something up. Without trust and explicit mechanisms for interdependence, the system defaults to silo behaviour. Each function pushes for progress on its own terms, and collective traction suffers. - Leaders default to short-term reactivity
When pressure rises, teams often regress. Leaders seek the psychological relief of “quick wins” or visible activity, even if it’s disconnected from strategy. It’s a form of flight into action: doing something now feels safer than holding the longer-term line. The team’s tolerance for uncertainty narrows, and resilience gives way to reactivity.
The result feels like sprinting on sand: exhausting, but not effective.
How to build traction deliberately
Leaders can take practical steps to close the execution gap:
- Anchor meetings in outcomes
Every agenda item should link explicitly to a strategic priority. If it doesn’t, ask whether it belongs in the meeting. - Track commitments publicly
Visible dashboards or action logs reduce “soft” commitments. Teams deliver more consistently when promises are written down and reviewed. - Separate debate from decision
Create clear stages: open challenge during discussion, then alignment once the decision is made (the Innovation Funnel Framework is a powerful tool for this). This reduces churn and signals commitment. - Normalise rapid resets
When setbacks happen, focus on reorienting quickly rather than replaying blame. This builds resilience. - Measure against outcomes, not outputs
High-traction teams look at whether their actions move the business towards fulfilling its purpose – not just whether tasks were ticked off.
How the X-Model helps
Traction is the convergence point in the X-Model. Without clarity of Task, strong Trust, and effective Team dynamics, discipline in delivery is almost impossible. But once those foundations are in place, the model lets teams ask hard, specific questions about traction:
- Do commitments translate into delivery?
- Do decisions turn into action?
- Are daily priorities visibly tethered to strategy?
- Does the team adapt under pressure and recover quickly?
By measuring these factors, the X-Model provides a shared map of where momentum is building – and where it’s leaking. Teams gain both language and data to intervene early, reset behaviours, and sustain progress over time.