Have you ever been held accountable for a process or a specific outcome that left you feeling less than good? Did it hurt? Were you confused, dispirited, or nauseous? Did the experience leave you disillusioned, demoralized, or damaged?

Well then, what you experienced probably wasn’t accountability at all. It is much more likely that you were being unfairly blamed for something you were not fully aware of or responsible for. It wasn’t being held to account. Accountability shouldn’t hurt.

Unfortunately, for many people, being held accountable can feel like being scapegoated, set up, or thrown under the bus.

When we simplify the value and concept of accountability, the experience of that value in operation can be affirming and meaningful. Offered here is a simple and highly practical assessment so that we can be certain of how to practice accountability and who to hold accountable.

Accountability must be something we all strive for, not something we run and hide from. The word accountability and the experience that comes with it should make us shine, not shiver.

The Dilemma: A Good Thing Gone Wrong

Accountability is one of the most common organizational values critical for enhancing integrity, building trust, and advancing both people and companies. However, it is not the value itself but the experience of the value in action that determines whether integrity and trust are fortified.

In theory, accountability is something we should all strive for. It is simple, straightforward, and admirable. When in play, accountability inspires people and groups to build and sustain greater capacity and achieve the best possible results.

However, accountability continues to exist as both an elusive and confusing phenomenon. Accountability has unfortunately been a less-than-positive experience and for many people, especially when it feels more like blame or punishment than anything most people would describe as honourable.

The Costs: They are Massive

As covered in the webinar Moral Injury: What is It? How to Stop It value incongruence results from value confusion and value misalignment and represents one of the five major killers of morale. The cost to employees and organizations overall are massive! Importantly, the negative impacts on employee morale, engagement, climate, culture, and organizational quality — including the top and bottom lines — are what should concern us most.

If the confusing and exceptionally uncomfortable experience that accompanies “accountability” continues to persist, people and the organizations they work for will never come close to realizing, never mind achieving, their full potential.

This is because we are all wired for safety. We are neurobiologically programmed to protect ourselves and those we care for. It follows then that people will avoid confusing and negative experiences and invest their time, effort, and energy into keeping themselves safe, rather than learning, developing themselves, or moving the organization forward. Especially if doing so involves taking unclear or unsafe risks.

The Solution: Change the Experience and Change the Outcome

The good news is that changing a person’s experience of accountability is 100% within our control.

When we make the value and the experience of accountability positive, affirming, and valuable, we minimize suffering and optimize human and organizational potential toward the greatest possibilities.

The following steps are intended to renegotiate the meaning and subsequent experience of accountability:

1. Admit and Embrace the Reality

If we can’t be honest about what we need to change, then it will never change. It’s time to admit that most people experience accountability as less than positive or meaningful. Over the last month, I have interviewed more than 200 managers in human services and business. I asked, “Have you ever been held accountable for something that, in your experience, ranged from not-so-positive to absolutely horrible?” The answers were a resounding yes — from 100% of the respondents! I’m done asking. It’s time that we do something about it.

2. Acknowledge That It’s Not Your Fault

One of the most difficult things to do is admit that we are not living up to or in step with our values and what we claim is important. However, it is easier to be more open to the idea when we know that it is not totally our fault. In upcoming posts and webinars, I will examine how we have never been taught to operationalize important values in action. I have developed a strong case for this in my book Responsive Leadership (SAGE, 2016). I look forward to sharing the steps for bringing values to life in future posts.

3. Simplify Accountability and Follow Through

Accountability means to take responsibility or to account for one’s actions. Two important pieces missing in this simple concept of accountability are the who and what guiding the actions. Where do the directives come from? Are they clear? Do they make sense? To whom are we being accountable and for what?

Accountability must be derived from, built on, and guided by the purpose, priorities, and values of the organization. These values must be more than just words on the wall.

Therefore, accountability is only truly possible if the people expected to act or behave in a certain way can answer two very important questions:

• What’s the point of this?
• Why should I do it in this way?

What’s the point is the question connected to the “what.” It’s the purpose, objectives, and priorities of a specific function or set of functions within a job. The term purpose-critical refers to activities that are critical for advancing the organization toward preferred outcomes. Every person must be able to answer the question, “What’s the point of this task?” If there is no point, there is no point.

Most employees who can answer this question on their own, or with the help of their leader, will see the value in the task that they are expected to do and, in most cases will get it done. When asked, “What’s the point of this?” by their direct reports, I encourage leaders to refrain from answering with responses like, “Because I said so” or “That’s the way we do things around here” or “Because I had to do it when I was in that role.” These responses are not helpful, nor do they provide insight or guidance and subsequently motivation for their employees.

Why should I do it in this way is the question that is connected to the “why.” It’s tied to the vision and values of the department and organization (or at least it should be). Values are referred to as “guiding” for this very reason. Values provide fuel to purpose in the form of passion, and values can be potent forces of motivation and engagement for most employees. In the Brivia webinar Is Your Company Compass Broken? we make a strong case for why companies require a vision and set of values that are meaningful to their people.

Both the “what” and “why” must be answered if we are to be successful at holding people accountable in a manner that offers value and meaning for all involved and, more importantly, lessens stress and unnecessary suffering.

A Simplified Example:

Joe is a Project Team Lead for a company called Awesome Company. Some of the company values are Excellence, Trust, Empowerment, and Our People First.

Scenario 1:

Joe is told by his manager to ensure that he conducts regular team meetings once a month to ensure that Project X is on track and that important targets are being met.

Joe’s manager emphasizes several key responsibilities (the “what”):

• Schedule and facilitate regular meetings
• Prepare an agenda for the meeting
• Review and complete the agenda in the meeting

Scenario 2:

Joe is told by his manager to ensure that he conducts regular team meetings once a month to ensure that Project X is on track and that important targets are being met.

Joe’s manager emphasizes key responsibilities (the “what”) and offers clarity around important values and expectations (the “why”):

• Schedule and facilitate regular meetings to gather input from the team around preferences for structure and process as well as feedback on how the meetings are going. Getting input from our members is important because we try to put them first; this empowers them to have a voice and a choice and is great for building trust.

• Because we believe in excellence and empowering the group, prepare a detailed agenda ahead of time that outlines purpose, process, and expected outcomes. To the extent possible, get input from team members. Don’t forget to do a personal check-in prior to business and check-out prior to the meeting end as this is good practice that builds trust by allowing members to connect with other team members. It also empowers members with the opportunity to have their voice heard.

Consider that Joe has completed all required tasks related to Project Team Lead competencies, scheduled all required meetings, developed and distributed agendas to all members, facilitated project meetings, and successfully completed all agenda items. Great! Or is it?

Imagine for a moment that the manager discovers that several meetings were rescheduled at Joe’s convenience and Joe was late for most of the sessions. The manager also discovered that in each meeting Joe rushed his own agenda, which was developed without input and submitted to members approximately an hour before the project meetings.

Joe followed through on the what but fell short of the why.

Real accountability is only possible when the person acting on a task can answer the questions “What’s the point?” and “Why should it be done in this way?”

Accordingly, Joe can only be held accountable for his performance in scenario 2. If the manager attempts to hold Joe “accountable” for his performance failing to align with company values in scenario 1, there is a good chance that confusion, frustration, and possibly anger will be experienced by at least one if not both parties.

Accountability shouldn’t hurt!

As leaders, it is critical for our team members to have clear expectations and an understanding of the what and the why. If members are not clear on these important items, then we will ultimately be attempting to hold the wrong person accountable.

The search for accountability must always start with the leader.

If you are interested in learning more about operationalizing important values in the context of performance and performance conversations, check out the CORE Leader Compass program here.

---

Stephen de Groot is President and Co-Founder of Brivia.

He is author of Responsive Leadership (Sage Publication, 2016) and Chief Architect of The CORE Algorithm: A Dynamic Framework for Optimizing Human Potential, Performance and Perseverance.

Learn more about Stephen de Groot and his work.