Skip to main content

95% of Companies Get Zero Return on AI. Here’s How to Join the 5%.

Written by spacityadmin on . Posted in AI, Business, Consulting, Latest News, Leadership, Strategy.

You paid for the tools. Your team uses them every day. So why does your profit look the same as last year? If you are chasing AI ROI for your small business and coming up empty, you are in good company — though that is not much comfort. This year MIT looked at hundreds of companies and found that 95% earned nothing back from their AI spending. Not small wins. Zero. At the same time, the world is on track to spend about $2.5 trillion on AI in 2026. The gap between what we spend and what we get back has never been wider. And right now, that gap is one of the the most discussed topics on X, Linkedin, etc..

The mood on LinkedIn changed

For two years LinkedIn was full of AI cheerleaders. That has changed. Feeds this fall are full of owners asking a sharper question. Not “can AI do this?” but “is our AI actually paying off?” Smart people are done being impressed. They want proof. One technology magazine even called 2026 “the year AI ROI gets real.” When the mood shifts like this, it is a gift to you. It means you can stop chasing shiny objects and start doing the boring work that actually pays.

The real reason your AI isn’t paying off

Here is the part most owners get wrong. They think the problem is the tool. It almost never is. MIT found the failures had little to do with technology. The problem was strategy — and where people chose to put AI to work. Most companies buy AI first and then go looking for a place to use it. That is backwards. It is like buying a delivery truck before you know what you sell.

McKinsey saw the same thing in 2026. About 88% of companies now use AI somewhere in the business. But only 6% are getting the full value from it. Eight in ten people say they feel more productive. Only about a third of companies see that show up in real profit. IBM found something just as sobering: CEOs report a return on only one in four of their AI projects. Why the giant gap? Because adding a fast tool to a broken process just gives you a faster broken process. The same pattern shows up with the newest shiny object, AI agents: McKinsey found 62% of companies are experimenting with them, but only 23% have managed to scale even one. Experiments feel like progress. They are not the same as profit.

Start with one workflow, not one tool

So how do you join the 5%? You stop thinking about AI as software you install. You start thinking about it as work you redesign. Pick one job in your company that eats time and money. Something you can measure. How long it takes to send a quote. How many hours your team spends copying numbers from one screen to another. How fast you answer a customer. Pick one, write down the number today, and then rebuild that single job around AI. MIT found the biggest wins were almost always in quiet back-office work — quoting, billing, scheduling, paperwork — not the flashy, customer-facing ideas owners get excited about.

This is a thinking habit more than a tech skill. I tell my coaching clients the same thing about AI that I tell them about their calendars: you cannot fix what you do not measure. If you cannot name the “before” number, you will never see the “after” number — and you will never know if the money was worth it. Owners who skip this step end up with the same decision fatigue AI was supposed to cure, because now they have five new tools and no clear scoreboard.

A quick example from the field

Say you run an $18 million distribution business — the kind of family company I work with often. Your inside sales team spends half its day building quotes by hand. You could buy five different AI tools and hand them out, which is what most owners do. Six months later nothing has changed and everyone shrugs.

Or you do it the 5% way. You pick one job: quoting. You measure it. Two hours per quote, forty quotes a week. Then you rebuild that one workflow so AI drafts the quote and a person only checks the exceptions. Now it takes twenty minutes. Your team wins back roughly sixty hours a week and quotes go out the same day instead of three days later. That is not a magic trick. That is one problem, measured, then solved. Do that four times a year and you have quietly transformed the company — without a single “big AI project.”

Give it more time than you think

One more lesson from my own experience. Owners quit too early. MIT found that two out of three companies expected a return within six months. The ones that actually won took about fourteen months. McKinsey put the number even higher — closer to eighteen to twenty-four months before the cash really turns. If you pull the plug at month five, you were not wrong about AI. You were wrong about the clock.

This is where good leadership beats good software. Scaling and change take patience, and patience is a leadership choice. The same discipline that makes a great quarterly planning session work is the discipline that makes AI pay off. You set a clear goal, you protect it from distraction, and you give it real time to grow.

Know what AI still can’t do for you

It also helps to stay honest about the limits. AI can draft the quote, but it cannot decide what kind of company you are becoming. It cannot pick your core customer or hold your team accountable. Those jobs are still yours. I wrote more about this in a piece on what AI still cannot do, and it matters here because the owners who win treat AI as a helper for the work, not a replacement for their judgment. Remember, too, that when everyone buys the same tool, everyone starts to sound the same. The goal is not to keep up. It is to build a real, differentiated edge. You can read more about how smart owners are pulling ahead in The AI Advantage.

Tomorrow’s move

So here is your homework, and it is simple. Do not buy anything this week. Instead, walk your floor and find the one job that wastes the most time and money. Write down the number. That is your starting line. Then ask a better question than most owners ask. Not “how do I use more AI?” but “what is the one process I would love to fix, and how could AI help me rebuild it?”

That small shift — from buying tools to fixing work — is the whole difference between the 95% who get nothing and the 5% who pull ahead. The spending numbers will keep climbing. The winners will not be the companies that spent the most. They will be the ones that started with a real problem, measured it, and had the patience to see it through. And here is the encouraging part: you do not need a big budget or a data team to play. You need one clear problem, one honest number, and the patience to see it through. That is a game any focused owner can win.

AI Is Making Every Business Sound the Same. Here’s How to Stand Out in 2026

Written by spacityadmin on . Posted in AI, Business, Latest News, Strategy.

Scroll through LinkedIn this week and you will notice something odd. The posts all sound alike. The same clean words. The same tidy advice. The same polished tone. There is a reason for that. More owners are letting AI write for them, and AI pulls from the same well everyone else uses. This is why a strong business differentiation strategy matters more in 2026 than it has in years. When everyone sounds the same, the company that sounds like itself wins. Standing out is no longer a nice extra. It is how you keep your prices, your best customers, and your future.

The loudest theme on LinkedIn right now is a quiet revolt against sameness. People are tired of faceless, AI-heavy content. The posts getting saved and shared are the human ones. Real stories. Honest lessons. A point of view you cannot get anywhere else. That trend is not just about social media. It is a warning about your whole business. If your company looks and sounds like every competitor, buyers will treat you like a coin machine. They will pick whoever is cheapest. That is a race you do not want to run.

The sameness problem is bigger than your feed

Here is the part most owners miss. The same force flattening LinkedIn is flattening whole industries. Almost every business now has the same tools. According to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, 89% of small businesses now use AI in some way, up from just 36% in 2023. When your rival down the street uses the same software, the same scripts, and the same playbook you do, the gap between you shrinks fast. What used to make you special becomes the floor, not the ceiling.

I saw a version of this years ago when I owned a technology services firm. For a while, our tools set us apart. Then everyone bought the same tools. Overnight, our “edge” was gone, and we had to find a deeper reason for clients to choose us. That lesson stuck. Tools get copied. A true difference does not.

So the question for 2026 is simple but sharp. If a customer stripped away your logo, would they still know it was you? If the honest answer is “probably not,” you do not have a differentiation problem you can fix with better marketing. You have a strategy problem. And that is good news, because strategy is something you can actually shape.

Why “better” is not a strategy

Most owners think they stand out by being better. Better service. Better quality. Better people. I hear it in almost every first meeting. The trouble is that everyone says the same thing. Your competitor also thinks their service is better. “Better” is a claim, not a difference. It lives in your head, not in the customer’s.

Real differentiation is not about being better at the same game. It is about playing a different game on purpose. It means choosing to do things your rivals will not or cannot copy. That takes courage, because it also means saying no. You cannot be different and be everything to everyone at the same time. The moment you try to serve every customer, you drift back into the gray middle where price is the only thing that matters. If you want proof of how costly that middle is, look at how most growing companies quietly leave money on the table. I wrote about that in why most growing companies price wrong. Weak differentiation and weak pricing are the same wound.

Start with the word you own

So how do you think about this the right way? I lean on Verne Harnish and the Scaling Up “7 Strata of Strategy.” The very first layer is powerful in its simplicity. It asks what word or phrase you own in the mind of your customer. Volvo owns “safety.” A great local builder might own “on time, every time.” What do you own? If you cannot answer in one or two words, your customers cannot either.

Do not rush to invent a clever slogan. That is the mistake. The word you own has to be true, and it has to be a promise you keep so often that people repeat it for you. This is where Donald Miller’s “Business Made Simple” thinking helps. If you confuse people, you lose them. Clear beats clever every time. Pick one clear idea, say it the same way everywhere, and back it up with how you actually run the company. Differentiation is not a tagline. It is a habit your whole team lives out.

Know your core customer cold

You cannot stand out to everyone. You can only stand out to someone. That is why the next move is to define your core customer with painful honesty. Not “small businesses.” Not “companies that want to grow.” Those are too wide to be useful. Who is the exact person who needs what you do best, will pay a fair price for it, and will tell their friends?

When you get this right, differentiation gets easier, because you stop guessing. You design your offer, your pricing, and your message around one real person instead of a fuzzy crowd. This is also where your values do quiet, heavy lifting. The companies that win the right customers tend to attract them through what they truly stand for, not what they claim in a brochure. If your values are just words on a wall, they cannot pull anyone toward you. I dug into that gap in why your company values are probably just expensive decorations. Real values are a filter. They repel the wrong customers and pull in the right ones. That is differentiation working while you sleep.

Your people and your data are the moat AI cannot copy

Here is the hopeful part of the 2026 story. As tools become the same for everyone, the things that make you human become worth more, not less. Business thinkers now agree that when AI models turn into a shared commodity, the real edge shifts to two places a rival cannot download. The first is your own data and know-how, built up over years of doing the work. The second is your people and their judgment. And the numbers back this up. Salesforce research found that 91% of small businesses using AI report higher revenue, but the winners are the ones who pair the tools with a clear human point of view, not the ones who let the tools speak for them.

This is why the LinkedIn revolt against sameness matters so much. Buyers can feel the difference between a real voice and a machine wearing a mask. Your story, your standards, your team’s hard-won wisdom, these are the moat. AI should make your people faster and sharper. It should never replace the reason a customer chose you in the first place. If you want to think through this the right way, start with strategy, not software. I made that case in why modern leaders need an AI strategy, not just AI tools.

A simple test you can run this week

Let me leave you with a challenge you can do in one meeting. Gather your leadership team and ask three questions. What word do we own in our customer’s mind? Who is the one core customer we are built to serve better than anyone? And what do we do that a competitor with the same tools still could not copy?

If the room goes quiet, do not panic. That silence is the most useful thing you will hear all quarter. It tells you exactly where the work is. Patrick Lencioni reminds us that healthy teams say the hard thing out loud, and this is a hard thing worth saying. The owners who face these questions now, while AI is flattening everyone else, will be the ones who still command real prices in three years. The owners who avoid them will keep sounding like the crowd, and the crowd competes on price until there is nothing left. You get to choose which one you are. Choose to sound like yourself.

If you want a thinking partner to help you find the words you own and build a strategy that cannot be copied, that is exactly the kind of work I do with owners of $5M to $50M companies. Let’s talk.

The AI Advantage: What Smart Business Owners Are Doing Differently in 2026

Written by spacityadmin on . Posted in AI, Business, Latest News, Strategy.

Here is a number worth sitting with: according to PwC’s 2026 AI Performance Study, 74% of the economic value created by AI is being captured by just 20% of companies. Everyone else is experimenting, spending, and hoping—but not winning.

If you run a business between $5 million and $50 million in revenue, you are almost certainly somewhere in the middle of this picture. You have probably adopted a few AI tools. Your team may be using ChatGPT for content or email drafts. You might be exploring automation in your operations. But the results have felt scattered. Helpful in spots, but not transformational.

That gap—between the companies AI is helping a little and the companies AI is genuinely accelerating—is not about technology. It is about leadership and process. Specifically, it is about how the owner is thinking about AI’s role in the business and how to transform business processes.

The Mistake Most Business Owners Are Making

The most common mistake I see is treating AI like a tool rather than a strategy. Business owners hand it to individual team members and say, ‘figure out how to use this.’ A few people do. Most do not. And the business captures a fraction of the possible value.

The companies in that top 20% are doing something different. According to IBM’s 2026 CEO Study, the CEOs of high-performing AI organizations are spending more than eight hours per week personally learning and directing AI adoption. They are not delegating the thinking. They are leading it.

That does not mean you need to become a technologist. It means you need to understand enough about what AI can and cannot do to make smart decisions about where it belongs in your business model. That is a leadership challenge, not a technical one.

Where AI Actually Creates Value for Your Size Business

For businesses in the $5M–$50M range, AI creates the most immediate value in three areas.

The first is decision support. Your instincts are valuable. But they are also shaped by what you have already experienced. AI can surface patterns across data that you would never have the time to analyze manually—customer behavior, pricing sensitivity, hiring patterns, operational bottlenecks. Used well, it does not replace your judgment. It improves the inputs your judgment is working from.

This is especially important if you are struggling with decision fatigue. When every decision flows through one person—you—the quality of those decisions erodes over time. AI does not eliminate that problem, but it can significantly reduce the cognitive load on the decisions that matter least, freeing you to think clearly about the ones that matter most.

The second area is operations. Scheduling, invoicing, inventory alerts, customer follow-up sequences, HR onboarding flows—these are the processes that consume enormous amounts of time in a $5M or $20M business, and they are also the processes most ready to be automated. The businesses capturing real AI value have mapped their operational workflows and systematically identified where a human is not actually required.

The third is marketing and content. This is where most business owners start, and they are right to. AI has become genuinely excellent at helping small businesses produce the volume of content, outreach, and follow-up that used to require a much larger team. The caveat: AI can produce the volume, but you still need to bring the voice. Content that converts is content that sounds like you, not like a machine.

The Leadership Question AI Cannot Answer

Here is the thing about AI that does not get discussed enough: it is extraordinarily good at executing on clarity and extraordinarily bad at creating it. If you do not have a clear strategy, a clear ideal customer, and a clear set of priorities, AI will help you pursue the wrong things faster. This is one of the core challenges I see in the shift from founder to CEO. Early-stage business owners often have strategic ambiguity baked into how they operate. That ambiguity was survivable when everything was slower. With AI accelerating execution, the cost of strategic confusion goes up significantly.

This is why the business owners getting the most out of AI are typically also the ones who have done the hardest leadership work: clarifying what they are building, who they serve, and what they are not going to do. AI does not make strategy less important. It makes it more important.

What the Winning 20% Have in Common

Based on the research and what I observe in my coaching work, the business owners capturing real value from AI share a few consistent traits. They treat AI adoption as a leadership initiative, not an IT initiative. They have identified two or three high-value use cases and gone deep on those rather than spreading AI thinly across everything. And they have built their teams’ capacity to work with AI—not just given people access to tools. This connects directly to what high-performing leadership teams do differently: they align on strategy first, then build the systems to execute it. AI is no different.

The 80% who are not capturing AI’s value are not failing because they lack the tools. They are failing because they have not made the leadership decisions that allow the tools to deliver. They are implementing before they have clarity. They are delegating the thinking before they have done it themselves.

A Practical Starting Point

If you want to close the gap between where you are and where the top performers are, start with one question: what is the highest-cost, lowest-judgment activity in your business right now?

Highest-cost means it consumes significant time from you or your team. Lowest-judgment means it does not require deep expertise or relationship—it is mostly process. That intersection is your best first AI opportunity. Fix it there. Learn from it. Then move to the next one.

If you want a more structured approach, this framework for evaluating the ROI of strategic investments applies directly to how you should be thinking about AI adoption. The discipline is the same: be clear about what you are trying to achieve, measure what changes, and do not mistake activity for progress.

AI is not going to make leadership easier. It is going to make strategic clarity more valuable. The business owners who win the next decade will be the ones who used this moment not just to adopt better tools, but to become sharper, clearer, more deliberate leaders. That is the advantage the top 20% already have. And it is available to you.

So What’s Next?

If you know you need to be doing something with AI, but aren’t sure what or where to start, the Newlogiq AI Assessment is worth exploring.  It is a structured 6-week package that includes education, an assessment of your current operations and a detailed 4-6 item roadmap with a guaranteed ROI that you can adopt.  It is a great starting point for owners and leaders of $5-$100M businesses.  Contact us today to learn more.

Stop Winging Q3: What a Real Quarterly Planning Session Looks Like for Growing Companies

Written by spacityadmin on . Posted in Business, Coaching, Latest News, Strategy.

Q2 ends in about five weeks. That means Q3 is coming whether you are ready or not. And right now, LinkedIn is full of business owners and executives talking about something that does not get enough airtime: the gap between having a strategy and actually executing one. It is a gap that shows up most painfully at the start of every new quarter.

Here is the hard truth: most business owners in the $5M to $50M range do not have a real quarterly planning process. They have a quarterly meeting. Those are not the same thing.

The Meeting That Masquerades as Planning

You have probably been in this meeting. Eight to ten people around a table. Someone pulls up a slide deck from the previous quarter and walks through what was on the list. Half the items are done. A few are partially done. A handful got quietly pushed to this quarter — or just disappeared. Nobody mentions the disappearing items.

Then the leader goes around the room asking each person what they are going to focus on for the next 90 days. Everyone calls out three to five things. Someone writes them down in a spreadsheet or maybe a project management tool that only one person looks at. The meeting ends and everyone goes back to their desks feeling mildly optimistic.

This is not planning. This is calendar theater.

Research from Rhythm Systems, one of the leading execution strategy firms for mid-market companies, confirms that most growing companies do not fail at strategy. They fail at execution — and that failure is quiet and cumulative. Goals get announced, but tradeoffs get deferred. Initiatives launch, but nobody truly owns them. Metrics exist, but they show up too late. Meetings fill calendars, but the same problems keep coming up. This is the pattern that keeps good companies stuck. Recognizing it is the first step. (Source: Rhythm Systems — Quarterly Planning Best Practices)

What Verne Harnish Got Right About 90 Days

In Scaling Up, Verne Harnish teaches that a company moves forward in 90-day sprints. Not a fiscal year. Not a three-year plan. Ninety days. The reason is simple: human beings are not wired to sustain focus for twelve months at a stretch. But most people can hold three to five priorities in mind for about 90 days if those priorities are clear and the team is aligned around them.

Harnish borrowed the concept of “Rocks” from Stephen Covey — the idea that before you fill a jar with sand and small pebbles, you need to drop in the big rocks first or they will never fit. In Scaling Up, Rocks are the three to five most important things that must get done this quarter. Not the top twenty things you wish would happen. The three to five non-negotiables. If everything else falls away and only the Rocks get done, the quarter is a success.

EOS — the Entrepreneurial Operating System — uses the same language and the same logic. So does the Business Made Simple framework. These systems are not identical, but they all arrive at the same conclusion: execution without a clear 90-day rhythm is execution in name only.

The business owners I work with who struggle most with execution are not the ones who lack ambition. They are the ones who carry too many priorities at once. When everything is a priority, nothing is. And when nothing is a priority, CEO decision fatigue sets in — that slow draining of mental energy that makes every decision feel heavier than it should.

What a Real Quarterly Planning Session Actually Looks Like

A proper quarterly planning session is not a three-hour meeting. It is a half-day to full-day event, held off-site if possible, with the senior leadership team and no laptops open for email. It follows a structure. It is not a brainstorm.

The agenda covers five things. First, you close out the last quarter honestly. You look at the Rocks from Q2. Which ones are done? Which ones slipped? And critically — why? This is not a blame exercise. It is a learning exercise. If the same Rock keeps getting pushed to next quarter, you either have a clarity problem, a capacity problem, or a commitment problem. All three have different solutions.

Second, you calibrate against your annual goals. You are a certain percentage through the year. Are you on track? Where is the gap? This is the moment to stress-test your numbers, not to celebrate that things are generally fine. Good companies use this moment to make honest adjustments to their annual forecast and their strategy. Struggling companies use it to reassure themselves that things will get better in the next quarter.

Third, you set Rocks for Q3. Three to five per functional leader. Not seven. Not nine. Three to five. Each Rock needs an owner, a clear definition of done, and a measurable outcome. If someone cannot articulate what “done” looks like for a Rock, it is not ready to be a Rock.

Here is a real-world example of how this plays out. A regional distribution company with $18M in revenue was trying to expand into a second geographic market. In their Q2 planning session, they set four company-level Rocks — including “complete the operational readiness checklist for the new market launch.” By the start of Q3 planning, three of the four Rocks were complete and the fourth was 60% done. The honest debrief revealed that the checklist had no single owner: the operations director thought the VP of sales owned it, and vice versa. They fixed the accountability structure and made it the lead Rock for Q3. That is what real planning catches before it becomes expensive.

Fourth, you establish a follow-through rhythm. The planning session itself is only as valuable as what happens after it. The Scaling Up model prescribes a weekly team meeting, a monthly review, and then the quarterly session again. Without this execution rhythm and leadership structure, even the best quarterly plan will drift within weeks.

Fifth, and this is the one most leaders skip: you discuss the one or two things most likely to derail the quarter before it starts. What is the biggest threat to Q3? What assumption are you making that might be wrong? The companies that navigate uncertainty best are not the ones with the most detailed plans. They are the ones that stress-test their plans before the stress arrives.

The Real Test Is What Your Team Does Monday Morning

Here is how you know if your quarterly planning is working: does your team come in on Monday morning knowing exactly what matters most this week? Not vaguely — specifically. “I am focused on X because it moves Rock 2 forward.” If your team cannot answer that question, your planning session was theater.

Better delegation does not happen by accident. It happens when everyone on your team knows what they own, what done looks like, and what support they need to get there. The quarterly planning session is where that clarity begins. Without it, you are the one holding everything together — which might feel like leadership but is actually the thing that keeps your business from growing.

The companies that run tight quarterly rhythms do not just execute better. They build cultures where people feel ownership instead of waiting for direction. If you have been noticing that your company values feel more decorative than operational, the quarterly planning process is one of the most practical places to start fixing that. Values become real when there are Rocks tied to them.

Q3 Starts in Five Weeks. Use Them.

You have roughly five weeks before Q2 is officially over. That is enough time to design and run a real quarterly planning session before July starts. If you have never done one the right way, this quarter is a good place to begin. If you have been doing something that looks like planning but does not quite feel like it, this is the moment to raise the bar.

LinkedIn right now is full of CEOs and founders talking about the gap between intention and execution. The gap is real. But it is closable — 90 days at a time.

If you are a business owner running a $5M to $50M company and want to talk through what a quarterly planning session should look like for your specific business, Newlogiq works with business owners like you to build these systems from the ground up. The first conversation is always free.

The AI Divide Is Real: What Small Business Owners Need to Know in 2026

Written by spacityadmin on . Posted in AI, Business, Latest News, Strategy.

LinkedIn is buzzing with a single conversation right now. Business owners, CEOs, and founders across every industry are asking the same question: “Are we falling behind on AI?” The answer, for most small businesses, is complicated. And that’s exactly why this topic deserves your full attention.

LinkedIn’s own economists have called 2026 “the defining year for small business AI adoption.” And the data backs that up. A QuickBooks survey found that 68% of U.S. small businesses now use AI regularly — up from just 48% in mid-2024. But here’s the part that almost nobody is talking about: adoption rate does not equal advantage. Using AI is not the same as using it well. For business owners running companies in the $5 million to $50 million range — especially family businesses — the AI conversation is filled with noise. Everyone is promising transformation. Most of what gets implemented ends up being a glorified email shortcut. Let’s cut through that.

The Gap Is Growing — And It’s Happening Fast

The Federal Reserve published research in April 2026 tracking AI adoption patterns across the U.S. economy. What they found should wake up any owner who has been on the sidelines: companies that adopted AI tools earlier are now pulling away from competitors at a pace that is difficult to close. It is not just about speed. It is about compounding advantage.

Here is a simple way to think about it. Imagine a business that uses AI to handle its weekly reporting, draft client communications, analyze margin data, and screen job applicants. That business gets back roughly six to ten hours of leadership time every week. Multiply that across a year and you are looking at 300 to 500 hours returned to strategy, client relationships, and growth. A competitor who is not doing this is running slower — permanently. This is what I call the AI divide. And it is not between big companies and small ones. It is between the small businesses that have gotten intentional about AI and the ones still treating it as a curiosity.

What’s Actually Working Right Now

When I work with business owners inside my coaching practice, I ask one simple question before we talk about any tool: “What is eating your time that does not require you specifically?” The answers are almost always the same. Reports. Emails. Research. Scheduling. Meeting summaries. Drafting SOPs. These are not strategic tasks. And they are exactly where AI earns its keep.

The data backs this up. According to 2026 research aggregated across multiple SMB studies, 62% of small businesses are using AI primarily for data analysis and reporting — the highest ROI category by a wide margin. Marketing automation comes in second at 54%. And the average productivity gain from generative AI tools works out to roughly $7,800 per employee per year. For a company with 20 employees, that is $156,000 in recovered capacity — without adding a single headcount.

But here is where most small businesses get it wrong. They buy tools before they buy clarity. They subscribe to five platforms, use none of them consistently, and conclude that “AI doesn’t work for our business.” That is not an AI problem. That is a process problem. I have written about how decision fatigue and poor decision frameworks derail even the best-intentioned leaders. The same principle applies here. Too many options, no clear filter.

Three Moves Every Small Business Owner Should Make Right Now

The first move is to audit your time — not your tools. Before you download anything, spend one week tracking where you and your leadership team are spending time on tasks that do not require your direct judgment. Most owners are shocked by what they find. This is not about efficiency for efficiency’s sake. It is about identifying where AI can buy you back the time you need to lead.

The second move is to start small and specific. Do not try to transform your entire operation in 90 days. Pick one workflow — meeting summaries, weekly reports, first drafts of client communications — and get great at using AI for that one thing. Master it. Then expand. The businesses building real advantage right now are not the ones chasing the newest tools. They are the ones who get disciplined about quarterly priorities and execute with focus.

The third move is to invest in your team’s AI literacy, not just your own. One of the most common mistakes I see is the owner becoming the AI champion while the team stays skeptical. Your business will only scale if your people are using these tools consistently. This is fundamentally a leadership development conversation as much as it is a technology conversation. The owner who hoards the tools creates a bottleneck. The owner who trains the team creates leverage.

A Real-World Example of the AI Advantage

Consider a hypothetical family-owned distribution company running about $18 million in revenue. The owner spends roughly 12 hours each week in operational review meetings, writing updates, and answering status questions that his team could handle with better systems. After working together on a 90-day AI integration plan — meeting transcription tools, automated weekly reporting dashboards, AI-drafted client proposals — that time drops to under four hours. What does he do with the extra eight hours? He visits two new prospective clients per week, re-engages a supplier relationship he had let drift, and starts working on the succession plan he has been putting off for two years.

That is not a technology story. That is a leadership story. AI just removed the obstacles. This kind of outcome is available to most small business owners. The gap is not technical. It is clarity about where to start and the discipline to follow through. If you are working through the Scaling Up or EOS frameworks, AI integration fits naturally into your rhythm. It supports your meeting structures, your KPIs, your accountability cadence. It does not replace the system — it accelerates it.

What AI Cannot Replace (And Why That Matters)

There is a counterweight to all of this worth naming directly. I have written about what AI genuinely cannot do, and that list matters now more than ever as AI becomes more capable. AI cannot replace your judgment about your people. It cannot sense the tension in a room during a family business disagreement. It cannot have the hard conversation with an underperforming manager or read the quiet signals in a client relationship that is starting to drift. These are the moments where leadership still wins — and where coaching still matters.

The best frame I have found: AI helps you execute faster, but it cannot help you choose the right strategy. Strategy is still yours. The goal is to free your brain from operational noise so you can think more clearly about the moves that actually matter.

The Question Worth Asking Yourself

Here is the version of the AI question I think is worth sitting with. Not “Are we using AI?” but “Is AI buying us more time to become the kind of company we want to be?” For a family business, that might mean the founder finally has two hours every Friday to think about succession. For a manufacturing CEO, it might mean the leadership team gets out of status meetings and into genuine strategy conversations. For a service company, it might mean proposals go out in two hours instead of two days.

The competitive environment in 2026 is real. The scaling challenges do not get easier. But the tools available to small business owners have never been more accessible. The question is whether you are going to use them with intention — or let the noise decide for you.

At Newlogiq, we work with business owners in the $5M–$50M range to build the clarity, systems, and leadership habits that create sustainable growth. If you are trying to figure out how AI fits into your strategy — not just your workflow — reach out at newlogiq.com. We would love to help you think it through.

Most scaling companies are leaving money on the table

MOST GROWING COMPANIES PRICE WRONG; HERE’S WHY

Written by spacityadmin on . Posted in Business, Coaching, Latest News, Strategy.

Most founders in the $5-50M revenue range leave money on the table. Not because they’re bad at their jobs, but because they’ve never actually rebuilt their pricing strategy as their business scaled.

Most scaling companies are leaving money on the table

You priced your offering when you had 10 customers. Maybe 50. You charged what felt reasonable at the time. Then you started winning bigger deals. Your product got better. Your market position strengthened. Your ops matured. And your pricing… stayed the same.

This is the pricing power gap.

It’s the gap between what you’re charging and what your market will bear. For most scaling businesses, it’s worth 15-40% of annual revenue that you’re leaving unclaimed. That’s not a typo. A company doing $25M in revenue is typically sitting on $3.75-10M in captured price opportunity.

Why This Happens

Three reasons, all fixable.

First: founder psychology. You built this thing from nothing. It feels expensive to you. You remember charging $2,000/month because that was a fortune when you started. Now you’re at $5,000/month and you feel like you’re already “expensive.” The market doesn’t care about your origin story. They care about the value you deliver relative to alternatives.

Second: operational invisibility. You’re not systematically tracking what you’re worth. You don’t have clean data on customer outcomes, ROI multiples, or competitive positioning. You’re pricing on intuition and what your salespeople can close, not on what your clients actually get back from you.

Third: segmentation failure. You’re charging everyone the same price for fundamentally different value. A $2M company using your software gets different ROI than a $50M company. A bootstrapped founder’s problem is different from a PE-backed growth stage company. But if you’re charging a flat rate (or worse, a percentage of revenue that doesn’t scale with your own costs), you’re systematically underpricing to sophisticated buyers.

The Reengineering Process

Pricing reengineering isn’t guesswork. It’s systematic. Most founders who work through a structured scaling-up framework discover that pricing sits at the intersection of strategy, psychology, and operations.

Start by mapping your customer outcomes. Not features—outcomes. What do your customers make, save, or avoid because they work with you? For B2B software, this is usually some combination of: revenue captured, cost reduction, time saved, or risk eliminated.

Quantify the outcomes. A customer using your platform that increases sales velocity by 3 weeks across a 100-person team isn’t a feature benefit—it’s $5-15M in unlocked revenue. A customer that reduces operational friction by 15% is saving the cost of 5-10 full-time roles. These numbers are your pricing power. If you need a structured approach to defining and measuring this, read “Value Proposition Design” by Osterwalder — it’s the bible for mapping customer outcomes to pricing tiers.

Segment by the size of the opportunity. A company with $500K ACV has a fundamentally different pricing model than one with $5M ACV. You need separate economic models for each. This isn’t just about price points—it’s about what you can afford to deliver at each tier.

Run a willingness-to-pay analysis. Simple version: ask 15-20 of your best customers: “If you had to replace us, what would you spend on an alternative?” Their answer is your ceiling. If they say $50K/year and you’re charging $15K, you have immediate optimization.

Build tiered pricing that reflects value, not just volume. Most scaling companies benefit from moving away from flat-rate or percentage-of-revenue models and toward value-based tiers. Example structure:

Starter: $X/month for companies doing <$5M revenue
Scale: $Y/month for companies $5-25M (usually 2-2.5x starter)
Enterprise: Custom for $25M+

The ratio matters. A 2-2.5x jump between tiers is healthy. Anything lower means you’re leaving money on the table. Anything higher creates friction for natural progression.

Implementation Strategy

You can’t just flip a switch. Existing customers are anchored to current pricing. New customer acquisition moves faster.

Phase 1 (months 1-2): Introduce new pricing tier on new sales only. Keep existing customers where they are (or grandfather them). This lets you test demand and refine the model with zero friction.

Phase 2 (months 3-6): Migrate customers up tiers as they naturally scale. When a customer crosses a revenue threshold (say, from $5M to $10M), move them to the next tier. Frame it as “we’re adjusting your plan because you’ve grown”—which is true.

Phase 3 (month 6+): Annual contract refresh conversations. When renewals hit, present the updated tier mapping. Most will accept—they’re already getting the value, and pricing adjustments feel normal at renewal time.

Expect customer churn of 3-7% during this process. That’s actually conservative. Most of that churn will be your smallest customers, which is fine—they have the lowest lifetime value anyway.

The Math

Let’s run a realistic example:

Current state: 80 customers at $10K/year average = $800K ARR.

After reengineering (new tiers, 12-month implementation):

  • 60 existing customers migrate to appropriate tiers (avg $14K/year, 20%+ churn)
  • 30 new customers added in year 1 (avg $16K/year, benefits from new pricing)
  • New ARR: ~$1.3-1.5M (62-87% growth) vs. $1.1M if you kept pricing as is and had NO churn

The upside isn’t just from raising prices. It’s from removing customer acquisition friction (prospects aren’t shocked by tier differences) and from natural upsell momentum (customers move up as they grow).

Common Mistakes to Avoid

Don’t confuse “raising prices” with “pricing optimization.” Raising prices by 20% across the board is dumb. Reengineering is about right-sizing the entire model.

Don’t price on cost. Your cost structure is irrelevant to what customers will pay. I don’t care that you had to hire three engineers to build this. I care what it’s worth to me.

Don’t set it and forget it. Pricing should be reviewed annually. Every 18 months, you should ask: “Are we still capturing the full value we deliver?”

Don’t tell your sales team last. They need to understand the logic before they talk to prospects. If you can’t explain why a customer at $20M revenue pays 2.5x more than one at $5M, your salespeople can’t either.

What This Unlocks

Pricing reengineering isn’t just about revenue. It’s a forcing function for clarity. You have to understand your customer segments. You have to quantify your outcomes. You have to decide who you’re building for.

If you’d like help working through this framework, Newlogiq’s business coaching specializes in helping scaling businesses close their pricing power gap.

The best part? Most of our clients see the upside within 6 months, not years.

Trust + Systems = Leadership that Works

Remote Team Management at Scale: Lead Without Micromanaging

Written by spacityadmin on . Posted in Business, Latest News, Leadership, Strategy.

Remote work solved a problem. It created three more.

Trust + Systems = Leadership that Works

When your team was in an office, visibility was passive. You walked by desks. You overheard conversations. You got a feel for who was crushing it, who was struggling, and who was just moving things around their desk.

Now? Your team is scattered across three states. You can’t walk by anything. And the temptation is strong: jump into Slack all day, request update calls, install monitoring software, or create daily standup rituals that feel more like surveillance than leadership.

Then you realize people are miserable. The ones who were going to leave are leaving faster. And you’ve built a culture of compliance instead of ownership.

This is the hybrid leadership trap: you can’t see work anymore, so you default to tracking it. And tracking kills the very thing remote work was supposed to provide: autonomy.

The answer isn’t more visibility. It’s better systems.

The Visibility Problem Is Actually a Trust Problem

Here’s what I hear from CEOs managing distributed teams:

“I don’t know if people are working.“

“How do I ensure they’re focused?”  

“Accountability seems to disappear without an office.“

These aren’t really problems with remote work. They’re symptoms of a deeper issue: you never built systems robust enough to run without you being present.

In an office, a weak system gets papered over by hallway conversations and ambient accountability. You catch problems because you’re around. Remote work strips away that cushion. Suddenly, the system’s weakness is catastrophic.

So leaders do what feels safe: they add oversight. More check-ins. More updates. More documentation of work. And what they actually build is a culture of fear.

Your best people—the ones who don’t need oversight—leave because they hate the constant reporting. Your weaker performers get worse because they’re spending energy managing the perception of work instead of doing work. And you become the bottleneck again, because now you have to review all these status updates.

The answer isn’t more control. It’s clear expectations, transparent outcomes, and trust.

What Remote Teams Actually Need

There are four things that replace the visibility you lost when people left the office:

1. Crystalline clarity on roles and outcomes.

Not tasks. Outcomes.

In an office, you can delegate something vague (“Look at that partnership opportunity”) and catch it if they misunderstand. Remote? Vague kills you.

Every person on your team needs to be able to finish this sentence: “I know I’m winning at my job when…“

And that sentence should not include “my boss approves my work.” It should include metrics.

The VP of Sales isn’t “checking in with prospects.” They’re hitting 50 qualified meetings a month and a 35% deal close rate. The Head of Marketing isn’t “managing social.” They’re generating 200 qualified leads monthly with <$50 CAC.

These aren’t made-up numbers. You define them, together, at the start. Then you trust them to hit them.

2. Asynchronous-first communication with structured check-ins.

Most remote companies over-index on meetings. It feels productive because you can see faces. But it’s actually killing deep work.

Here’s the better model:

Async by default: Team members update progress in shared docs, Slack channels, or project management tools on their own schedule. No daily standups. No “what did you do yesterday” rituals.

Sync when necessary: Weekly 1-on-1s (30 mins, focused on blockers and coaching, not reporting). Monthly all-hands (vision, wins, what’s coming). Quarterly deep dives on strategy.

This does two things:

  • It protects deep work time (especially for engineers, designers, strategists)
  • It forces clarity (people write down their progress, which means they have to think about it)

The asynchronous record also becomes your visibility. You can see what’s being shipped, not just that someone was “at their desk.” Companies like GitLab have pioneered this approach, documenting their entire communication culture asynchronously.

3. Outcome-based reviews, not activity-based reviews.

This is huge and most companies get it wrong.

When you can’t see people working, the temptation is to measure activity: hours logged, emails sent, messages responded to. It’s a trap.

Judge by outcomes. Did they hit their numbers? Did they ship? Did customers/stakeholders get what they needed? If yes, how they spent their time is not your business.

There will be people who work 35 hours and ship 10x. There will be people who work 50 hours and ship 2x. In an office, the person who looks busy wins the culture war. Remote? The person who delivers wins.

This is actually more fair. And it’s definitely more scalable.

4. Psychological safety so people actually tell you when something’s wrong.

Here’s the risk no one talks about: remote teams with bad communication cultures go silent when there’s a problem.

Someone’s struggling? They don’t want to “bother” you over Slack. There’s a risk you’re not seeing? They assume you know and don’t say anything. A project is derailing? They wait for the next check-in, by which time it’s too late.

In an office, you catch these because you overhear, bump into someone, see body language. Remote? You need intentional cultural permission to speak up.

This is where Patrick Lencioni’s work on psychological safety becomes critical. His research shows that teams with high psychological safety outperform those without it by a significant margin.
:

  • Regular 1-on-1s focused on “What’s blocking you?” and “What would help?” not “Did you finish?”
  • Blameless problem-solving (“That missed deadline was bad. Let’s figure out what broke so it doesn’t happen again”)
  • Public acknowledgment when someone surfaces a risk early (“Thank you for flagging this. This is exactly what we need to know”)
  • Modeling vulnerability (“I made this mistake last week. Here’s what I learned”)

You build trust by showing that the culture is genuinely safe for people to be honest about problems.  Kim Scott’s Radical Candor framework reinforces this: care personally, challenge directly. Remote teams need both

Building the System That Replaces Your Presence

Here’s what this actually looks like implemented:

Quarterly planning: Each person’s OKRs or key results are defined in a shared doc. Not written down by you. Co-created in conversation. Then it’s their north star.

Weekly async updates: Monday AM, each person posts a 2-3 bullet summary: What won this week. What’s coming next. What’s blocked. It’s not “I worked 40 hours.” It’s “We hit 45 qualified meetings, closed 2 deals, and we need to finalize the vendor contract.”

Weekly 1-on-1s: 30 minutes, video. Agenda: blockers, coaching on 1-2 items, and one personal question (how are you, what’s on your mind outside work). Not a status dump. A conversation.

Monthly all-hands: 45 minutes. CEO shares: where we are, where we’re going, wins from the team. Space for Q&A. Feeling of “we’re in this together.”

Slack norms: Async-first. If something needs an immediate response, people DM you. Otherwise, you catch up in batches. Set expectations: “I check Slack mornings and evenings, not continuously.”

Quarterly reviews: Based on outcomes vs. goals. What did they ship? What impact did it have? What could they improve? Where do they want to grow?

This system doesn’t require you to know what everyone did every day. It requires you to know: Are they hitting their outcomes? Are they unblocked? Are they growing? Are they honest with me about problems?

And oddly, that’s better information than presence.

The Company That Runs Without You in the Room

Here’s what happens 6 months into this approach:

  • People aren’t waiting for your input. They’re making decisions with clear frameworks.
  • Problems surface early because the culture is safe for honest conversations.
  • You actually know what’s happening in the company better than you did when people were “in the office”—because it’s all documented.
  • Your best people stay because they get autonomy without abandonment.
  • Meetings are shorter and fewer because you’re not defaulting to video calls for everything.

And maybe most importantly: you’re not the bottleneck anymore.

You’re not reading activity logs. You’re not in every meeting. You’re not the person who has to approve everything. You’re leading a company that runs because it has systems, not because you’re present.

That’s what scales.

Key Takeaway

Remote work doesn’t require more monitoring. It requires better systems. Define outcomes clearly, use asynchronous communication as your default, judge by results not activity, and build psychological safety so people actually tell you what’s happening. Do that, and hybrid work becomes your competitive advantage—not your management headache.To learn more about how to apply this to your unique situation, contact Newlogiq today.

Beyond EOS Year 3: Scaling Leadership When Systems Stop Working

Written by spacityadmin on . Posted in Business, Latest News, Leadership, Strategy.

The Conversation Happens Around Year 4

Sarah runs her company with flawless EOS discipline. Level 10 meetings every week. Rocks defined every quarter. The People Analyzer filled out. The Vision/Traction Organizer sitting proudly on her desk.

It worked beautifully for three years.

But last month, she called me with a frustration I’ve heard dozens of times: “We’re still having the same conversations. The issues aren’t changing. And honestly? The system feels like it’s running us instead of us running it.”

She asked the question that signals a deeper problem: “Is there something after EOS?”

Yes. And you probably need it.

The EOS Sweet Spot (And Its Limits)

First, let me be clear: EOS is brilliant. It’s the most effective operating system I’ve seen for taking a chaotic $1-8M company and bringing it structure, alignment, and accountability.

The Level 10 meeting cadence works. The Rocks system creates clarity. The People Analyzer surfaces difficult conversations. The V/TO gives people direction.

For the first 2-3 years, EOS typically delivers:

  • Faster decision-making
  • Clear accountability
  • Reduced chaos
  • Aligned leadership team
  • Measurable business momentum

The problem isn’t that EOS fails. The problem is that success itself reveals the limits.

When you cross $5M, when your leadership team grows beyond 4-5 people, when you move from a single product/market to multiple business units, EOS starts to feel thin.

Not because it’s broken. Because your complexity has outgrown its framework.

The Three Ways the EOS System Plateaus

1. Strategy Stops Being Strategic

The V/TO was designed as a one-page snapshot: your purpose, values, vision, goals. Beautiful simplicity.

But when you need to think about market positioning, competitive differentiation, pricing strategy, revenue model evolution, or geographical expansion, one page isn’t enough. The V/TO starts to feel like it’s in the way rather than clarifying direction.

You find yourself doing strategy work *outside* the system because the system doesn’t have room for it.

2. Leadership Development Becomes Invisible

“Right people, right seats” is excellent shorthand. It pushes you to think about fit. But it doesn’t tell you:

  1. How you’re building future leaders for the next two years
  2. What pipeline you’re creating for your next layer of leadership
  3. How you’re systematically closing gaps between current capability and future needs
  4. How you’re creating true bench strength so you’re not dependent on any single person

You end up with a team that’s organized well but not developing strategically. When someone leaves, you panic because you didn’t build a bench.

3. Financial Strategy Remains Surface-Level

EOS gives you a scorecard. Metrics. Execution discipline. But it doesn’t give you, pricing architecture and margin strategy, cash flow forecasting by business unit or customer segment, capital efficiency metrics, profitability levers and sensitivity analysis or the relationship between revenue growth and profitability.

You can be hitting your numbers and still running low on cash. You can be growing at 30% and destroying profitability. EOS doesn’t catch it because EOS doesn’t go that deep into financial strategy.

If you want to dig deeper into these issues, read a recent post that takes a deep dive on EOS plateau specific framework options.

The Real Problem: Systems vs. Leadership

Here’s what I’ve come to understand: systems take you from chaos to clarity. Leadership takes you from clarity to scale.

EOS is a magnificent system. But it’s a system. Which means it works best when it’s well-designed and well-executed, but it works within limits.

The companies that scale beyond $5-10M don’t do it because their systems improved. They do it because their leadership improved.

That’s the shift that typically happens around Year 3-4 of EOS. You realize: the system is locked in. We’re executing it well. But we’re not leading strategically.

A few examples of what I mean:

Sarah’s Case: EOS got her to $7M. Clean leadership team. Good execution. But at $7M, she realized she needed to make strategic bets:

  • Invest in a new market (risky, might cannibalize existing revenue)
  • Shift pricing model (improves profitability but requires customer re-negotiation)
  • Build a new division (requires new leadership structure)

Her EOS system couldn’t help her think through these choices because they exist outside the one-page vision. She needed a framework for strategic thinking, not just execution discipline.

Marcus’s Case: Marcus had $9M revenue and a 4-person leadership team. All in the right seats. All executing rocks well.

But none of them were ready to step into larger roles when the company needed to expand from 30 to 50 people. He’d optimized for current execution rather than future leadership. By the time he realized the gap, it was painful and expensive.

John’s Case:  John had profit margins that looked good on paper (25%) but cash flow was tight. EOS metrics showed strong progress. But he wasn’t tracking margin by customer segment, wasn’t managing pricing discipline, and had no visibility into cash conversion cycle.

When a big customer went away, the company nearly imploded—not because the loss was that big, but because he’d never developed financial literacy beyond scorecard metrics.

All three of them needed something more than a better-executed system. They needed a different kind of thinking.

What “Leadership Beyond Systems” Looks Like

The next evolution for companies that have maximized EOS typically involves:

1. Strategic Clarity Beyond the Vision Statement

Strategic thinking means:

  • Clear understanding of what makes you different (and defensible)
  • Intentional choices about where not to compete
  • 3-5 year roadmap that’s customer/market driven, not just revenue driven
  • Meaningful diversification strategy (new products? new markets? new customer segments?)
  • Coherent capital allocation across strategic bets

This is the work that the Scaling Up framework handles well. EOS doesn’t have the tools for it.

2. Leadership Bench Building

Not just “right people right seats” but:

  • Intentional talent pipeline for the next 2-3 layers of leadership
  • Development plans for high-potential team members
  • Systematic skill-building in your leadership team
  • Succession planning that’s real, not theoretical
  • Cultural clarity about what “leadership in our company” means

This means moving from a 90-day goal orientation to a multi-year people strategy.

3. Financial Sophistication

Beyond the dashboard and KPIs:

  • Margin analysis by customer, product line, or business unit
  • Cash flow dynamics and capital requirements
  • Profitability drivers and how to optimize them
  • Unit economics for new initiatives
  • Financial modeling for strategic scenarios

When you have this, you stop having vague conversations about “profitability” and start having precise conversations about “which customer segments and products are actually profitable, and which are subsidizing growth?”

4. Execution Across Complexity

EOS meetings work great for a core leadership team of 4-5 people. When you have 8-10 people, or multiple divisions, or matrix accountability, the Level 10 format starts to strain.

You need:

  • Different cadence and format for different organizational layers
  • Cross-functional alignment mechanisms (not just departmental)
  • Cascading goals that actually cascade (and don’t contradict)
  • Innovation budgets and processes for experimental work
  • Risk management frameworks for decisions outside the quarterly cycle

What Happens to Founders Who Push Through

I’ve worked with dozens of founders who’ve successfully navigated the EOS-to-next-phase transition. Here’s what changed:

They Stopped Optimizing for Execution and Started Optimizing for Scale

Early years: How do we execute our plan better?

Next phase: Are we building an organization that can grow beyond our current leadership capacity?

They Built Advisory/Strategic Partners

Usually around Year 4-5, the best scaling companies brought in fractional CFO expertise, strategic advisors, or board-level coaching. Not because something was wrong, but because the complexity required deeper expertise than internal team could provide.

They Separated Strategy from Execution

This is critical. They protected space for strategic thinking—often quarterly or bi-annual strategic off-sites—and separated it from the weekly execution rhythm.

They Invested in Their Own Leadership Development

The founders who broke through realized: the system is only as good as the leader running it. They invested in executive coaching, peer groups, or mastermind groups to develop themselves at the level the next phase required.

The Most Important Question

Here’s the question I ask founders who’ve hit the EOS ceiling:

“What would it look like if your company could grow profitably 10x without you needing to work harder?  100x?”

Most of them can’t answer it because they’ve never thought strategically about it. EOS got them to $5-10M with excellence in execution. But $50M or $500M requires excellence in strategy AND execution.

You need both. EOS gives you execution. But you need something more for strategy.

Your Honest Assessment

If any of these feel true, you might be at the EOS ceiling:

  • You’re executing flawlessly but growth has slowed
  • You have the right people in the right seats, but no clear pipeline for the next level
  • Your metrics are solid but you’re not sure about profitability by customer or product
  • You’ve hit a growth plateau that feels like it’s about your current team’s capacity, not market opportunity
  • You’re running the system, not leading the company
  • Your best people are asking “what’s next for me?” and you don’t have an answer

If three or more of those resonate, it’s time to evolve beyond the system.

What Comes Next

You don’t abandon EOS. Most of the best scaling companies I know keep Level 10 meetings and the Rocks system. Those tools still work.

But you layer on strategic thinking frameworks. You add financial depth. You build leadership development systems. You create strategic planning cadences.

For some companies, that looks like Scaling Up. For others, it’s a custom blend of frameworks. But all of them move from “executing a system” to “leading an organization.”

The Transition

The transition from Year 3 of EOS to Year 4+ of Scaling Up typically takes 6-12 months. Here’s what I usually recommend:

Quarter 1-2: Assess where you are. Is the EOS ceiling real? Are there genuine gaps in strategy, finance, or leadership that the system can’t address?

Quarter 2-3: Introduce new frameworks or tools for the areas where you’ve hit limits. Don’t replace EOS, layer on.

Quarter 3-4: Let it settle. Get comfortable with the new rhythm. See what works. What doesn’t.

Year 2: Refine. Double down on what’s working. Modify what isn’t.

Your Move

If you’re past Year 3 of EOS and something feels off, trust that instinct. It’s not a sign the system failed. It’s a sign you’ve succeeded at the first phase and you’re ready for the next one.

The companies that successfully scale recognize that transition points are normal. What got you to $5M won’t get you to $20M. That’s not failure—that’s growth.

If you’re ready to explore what “beyond EOS” looks like for your company, let’s talk about where you actually are and what’s next.  Schedule a Free Discovery Call. If you want to learn more about the core of Scaling Up and assess your current organization, read this great overview article on the Rockefeller Habits.

Why Most Quarterly Planning Sessions Are a Waste of Time (And What to Do Instead)

Written by spacityadmin on . Posted in Business, Coaching, Latest News, Strategy.

It’s the start of Q2. Your team is gathering around the conference table—or on a Zoom call—and everyone has that familiar look. Part hopeful, part exhausted. Last quarter’s Rocks didn’t all get done. The issues list is still full. And somewhere between the PowerPoint slides and the catered lunch, you wonder: Is this session actually going to change anything?

For most $5M–$50M business owners, the honest answer is no. Not because quarterly planning is a bad idea. But because the way most teams run these sessions is broken before the meeting even starts. The problem isn’t commitment. It’s execution. And the difference between a quarterly session that drives real traction and one that just burns a day comes down to a few critical choices.

The good news: those choices are learnable. Let’s dig in.

The 90-Day Rhythm Is Real—But Only If You Take It Seriously

Verne Harnish’s Scaling Up framework and Gino Wickman’s EOS (Entrepreneurial Operating System) both center on the power of 90-day execution cycles—and for good reason. Human beings’ attention spans and energy naturally align to roughly three-month windows. Annual goals are too distant to feel urgent. Monthly reviews don’t give enough runway to build momentum. But 90 days? That’s close enough to feel the pressure and far enough to accomplish something meaningful.

Research from the EOS community confirms that teams operating inside a clear 90-day world consistently outperform those stuck in annual planning mode. Rocks get completed. Accountability sharpens. And teams stay aligned because everyone is executing against the same short-term priorities—not some twelve-month wishlist nobody remembers by March.

(Not sure which framework is right for your business? Read: EOS vs. Scaling Up vs. Business Made Simple: Which One Fits Your Business?)

What Most Teams Get Wrong

Here’s the pattern I see again and again with the business owners I coach. The quarterly session is scheduled. People show up. Someone opens a Google Doc or fires up the slideshow. You review last quarter’s priorities. A few things got done. A few didn’t. Nobody fully explains why. Then you spend forty-five minutes listing new priorities—and call those your “Rocks.”

But they’re not Rocks. They’re wishes. A real Rock, in EOS language, is a specific, measurable outcome that one person owns and that can clearly be marked complete or not complete at the end of the quarter. A wish sounds like “improve marketing.” A Rock sounds like “Launch the updated website by May 31, owned by Sarah.” Those are completely different commitments.

The second mistake is more subtle. Most teams treat the quarterly meeting as a standalone event. They walk in cold, talk fast, and walk out with a list of priorities nobody truly believes in. The meeting becomes a ritual, not a turning point.

The real problem? More meetings without more clarity won’t fix execution. For a deeper look, read: Why ‘More Meetings’ Isn’t the Answer to Execution Problems.

The Pre-Work That Changes Everything

The most effective quarterly sessions I’ve facilitated don’t start at 9:00 a.m. on the day of the meeting. They start two to three weeks before, with structured prep work that every leader completes individually. Here’s what that looks like.

Each leader reviews their personal Rocks from last quarter and honestly scores each one complete or not complete—no “80% done.” They review their weekly measurables (their scorecard numbers). They identify the top issues they want to solve in the coming quarter. And they come in ready to talk about what’s working, what isn’t, and what genuinely needs to change.

When every leader walks into the room having done this work, the conversation is completely different. You spend less time catching up and more time solving. You spend less time debating what’s important and more time committing to it. That’s when quarterly planning becomes a competitive advantage.

What a Great Quarterly Session Actually Looks Like

A great quarterly planning session has four movements. First, you close the last quarter. That means reviewing every Rock (complete or not) with brutal honesty, reviewing your scorecards, and identifying patterns in what’s working and what keeps breaking. No sugarcoating.

Second, you open the new quarter. You revisit your one-year plan and ask: are we still on track? Has anything changed that we need to account for? This is where strategy meets reality.

Third, you set Rocks. Not twenty priorities. Not ten. Between three and seven Rocks per quarter at the company level—and the same for each leader. Less is more here. Trying to move fifteen things forward simultaneously is how nothing actually moves. The discipline of choosing your top three to seven is where most teams fail, and it’s where the best teams win.

Fourth, you clear the Issues List. This is the heart of Gino Wickman’s IDS process: Identify, Discuss, Solve. For each major issue facing the business, the team names it clearly, discusses the root cause honestly, and lands on a clear resolution. Issues that leave the room unresolved are issues that will cost you next quarter.

If accountability is slipping between quarters, there’s usually a clarity problem underneath it. Read: Why Accountability Systems Fail Without Clarity.

How to Know If Your Quarterly Was Worth It

Here’s the test I give every leadership team I work with. After the session, every leader should be able to answer three questions without hesitation. First: What are my Rocks for this quarter and what does ‘done’ look like for each one? Second: What are the three most important things the company is focused on achieving in the next 90 days? Third: What was the most important issue we solved today, and how did we resolve it?

If anyone on your team can’t answer those questions walking out of the room, the session didn’t work. Not because people weren’t in the room. But because the session lacked the structure and discipline needed to create genuine alignment.

Here’s a hypothetical I share with clients. Imagine two companies at the same revenue level. Company A has great people but runs quarterly planning as a loose two-hour all-hands meeting. Company B runs a disciplined full-day session with prep work, real Rocks, and a cleared Issues List. Within a year, Company B consistently outpaces Company A—not because they worked harder, but because they were aligned on what mattered.

High-performing leadership teams have distinct habits beyond just planning sessions. See what else sets them apart: What High-Performing Leadership Teams Do Differently.

The Framework That Makes This Stick

Whether you use EOS, Scaling Up, or Business Made Simple, the underlying principle is the same: great execution requires great rhythm. Quarterly planning is not a box to check. It is the engine that turns your annual goals into 90-day realities.

According to the EOS Quarterly Meeting Guide from EOSWorldwide, the most effective sessions share a common trait: they are treated as sacred time—not a calendar obligation, but a leadership discipline. The structure is respected. The prep work is done. And the team leaves with clarity, commitment, and a short, focused list of what must happen next.

That’s the kind of quarterly planning that doesn’t just fill your calendar. It fills your pipeline, builds your team, and drives your business forward one 90-day sprint at a time.

Your Next Step

If your last quarterly planning session felt like a waste of time, the answer isn’t to skip the next one. The answer is to run it differently. Start with the pre-work. Set real Rocks. Clear your Issues List. And walk out of the room with every leader aligned on what’s next.

If you’d like help facilitating your next quarterly planning session or building a meeting rhythm that actually drives growth, let’s talk. That’s exactly the kind of work we do at Newlogiq.

And if quarterly planning feels hard because you’re still the bottleneck in your business, start here first: How to Stop Being the Bottleneck in Your Own Business.

—————

Jeff Oskin is the founder of Newlogiq and a Scaling Up and DISCPlus certified coach. He works with $5M–$50M business owners and family businesses to build leadership, create execution systems, and scale with confidence.

Your Hiring Problem Isn’t Really a Hiring Problem

Written by spacityadmin on . Posted in Business, Coaching, Latest News, Leadership, Strategy.

You’ve hired the wrong person. Again.

It happens to almost every small business owner at some point. You find someone who seems great in the interview. You bring them on. And then, a few months later, something is clearly off.

So you start over. Another job post. Another round of interviews. Another hire that doesn’t quite work out.

Here’s the hard truth: if this keeps happening, the problem probably isn’t the people you’re hiring. The problem is the system — or lack of one — you’re using to hire them.

Why Small Business Owners Keep Hiring Wrong

SHRM, the Society for Human Resource Management, estimates that a bad hire can cost up to 50-60% of that employee’s annual salary — when you factor in recruiting, training, lost productivity, and starting over. For a small business, that’s not just painful. It can be a real threat to your survival.

But why does it keep happening?

The most common reason: most small business owners hire for skills and fire for culture. They look at a resume and think about what someone can do. They don’t think hard enough about whether this person fits how the business works — and needs to work — going forward.

The Three Root Causes

  1. No clear role definition. If you can’t describe what success looks like in the role after 90 days, you can’t hire for it. Most owners hire on gut feel because the role was never clearly defined in the first place.
  2. No alignment to your core values. If your company doesn’t have written core values — or if you don’t use them in your hiring process — you’re leaving culture to chance. Patrick Lencioni makes this point clearly in The Advantage: a team that’s not aligned on values will always struggle, no matter how talented the individuals are.
  3. You’re hiring to fill pain, not to build strength. When someone critical leaves, the pressure to fill the seat fast is real. That pressure causes you to lower your standards. You hire the best of a bad batch instead of waiting for the right person.

What a Better Hiring Process Looks Like

You don’t need an HR department to hire well. You need a process. Here is a simple one to start with:

Write a one-page role scorecard before you post the job. Define the top three outcomes the person must achieve in their first 90 days. Make those outcomes — not the job duties — the center of every interview.

Add one values-based question to every interview. Ask the candidate to describe a time they had to make a hard call when no one was watching. Their answer will tell you more about their character than their entire resume.

Slow down when you feel the most pressure to go fast. If you catch yourself saying “good enough” during a hiring process, stop. That is your signal to pause, not push forward.

The Bigger Picture: Leadership Comes First

Hiring problems are often symptoms of a deeper leadership challenge. When a team doesn’t have clarity — about goals, about roles, about what is and isn’t acceptable — the wrong people feel comfortable staying and the right people feel uncomfortable leaving. We explore this more in What Your Team Needs From You as a Leader.

And if you’ve been losing good people before you’ve had a real chance to help them succeed, it’s worth reading If Your Team Isn’t Pushing Back, You Have a Problem. Psychological safety and hiring are more connected than most owners realize.

One Last Thing

You can’t build a great business with the wrong team. But you also can’t build a great team without a clear picture of what great looks like.

That clarity — about roles, about culture, about what you actually need — is work that starts with you, not with your next hire.

Take the time to build the process. It will save you more money — and more headaches — than any single hire ever could.

────────────────────────────────────

Jeff Oskin is a Scaling Up certified coach who helps small and family-owned businesses hire better, lead better, and grow with purpose. Learn more at newlogiq.com.