Kathy, thanks for this helpful and illuminating post about accountability. Its importance in leadership and teamwork cannot be overstated. In teams I coach, often times accountability is lacking, partly because people are confused about its meaning and how it's different from its cousins -- ownership and responsibility.
Accountability, I offer as a definition, is “taken” and means making a wholehearted commitment to deliver expected outcomes. Once that promise is made, you answer to others who have entrusted you with the outcome and who will hold you accountable in a positive and principled way (not as a throat to choke) if it is not delivered according to agreed expectations. Accountability in effective teams and organizations is managed through a system of rewards, recognition, consequences, evaluation, measurement and feedback. In a team context, the accountable leader is solely and ultimately answerable for the quality of the team's collective work and its timely completion. Those of you familiar with RACI charting will recognize that the "A" is vested with approval power, veto rights and decides who participates in decision-making and how decisions will be made. The "A" is accountable for his or her judgment and discernment.
In contrast, Responsibility can be viewed not as "taken," but rather as “bestowed” in the form of a duty or task that has been assigned (including to oneself) because the doer has the requisite competency (skills, knowledge, personal attributes) to carry it out, meaning the doer is “able” to “respond” -- the root of responsible. A responsible party is still accountable, but usually only for delivering a quality work product on time, unless the person has also taken full, broad leadership accountability as described above.
Finally, Ownership is “chosen” as a proprietary orientation to one’s work, goals and the mission. Ownership happens when team members and individual contributors give discretionary effort and put 100% of themselves into it, whatever it is. This is a big part of employee "engagement." And leaders would do well to attend to it, recognizing that the highest level of engagement can't be demanded. Ownership, however, can be fostered by leaders providing challenging work, demonstrating genuine care, providing autonomy, connecting work to a higher purpose, promoting collaboration, celebrating, creating a fun environment and developing others.
Having these distinctions -- accountability, responsibility and ownership -- promote role clarity and clear decision-making, no matter at what level of a company, whether it's the executive team or a product-development group.
A hallmark of high-performing teams and management groups is this. The members hold one another mutually accountable for the promises and commitments they make to one another. This, though, is only possible if the team members trust one another and can handle the conflict entailed in tough, straight-talk conversations.
As XPX members observe their clients' leadership behavior, especially during the sale process, a great opportunity may arise to notice when the players are not holding one another accountable, as failure to do so could severely impair the transaction.
What are your thoughts? Let's get a discussion going.
Dan Brown, PCC
Certified Leadership Coach
dbrown@xponentialpub.com
P.S. I'd like to credit the following people and firms for the source material used to write this XPX posting: Lisa Haneberg, MPI Consulting; RACI Training; Teams at Work; One21Five; and MiroGroup
