Volume  9, No. 3
May 2009

Workforce Accountability

Is it just me, or do many people in the workplace (and in our society) seem to cringe when the word “accountability” is mentioned?  Perhaps that word conjures up uncomfortable images of some looming conflict or punishment.  Or perhaps it runs contrary to the popular notions of helplessness and victimhood prevalent in certain circles.  Or perhaps it is the way the word is commonly used.  We often speak of “holding someone accountable” as if we are physically constraining them while they fight frantically to break free.

Whatever the reason, I do believe this word often carries a negative connotation, and I also believe this has an impact in the workplace.  If accountability is viewed negatively and as a source of potential conflict, it will be tempting for organizations to avoid it or dance around it.  And this is exactly what happens in many cases. Instead of producing an honest assessment of an individual’s performance, for example, a manager may try to soften the blow.  “Sure he did not produce the results we thought he could, but damn—at least he tried!”

But what is accountability?  In my view, accountability is nothing more than a commitment between two people to agreed upon results.  The key word is results—not the education we have, or the experience we bring, or the effort we make, or the potential we possess—but the results we bring to the organization.

True accountability is not created under the cloud of penalty or punishment—it is a personal commitment to produce results.  For that personal commitment to be possible, certain conditions must exist in the organization.  And it is the responsibility of management to ensure that those conditions are in place.

What are those conditions?  I believe the most important are transparency and trust.  Employees must clearly understand what is expected of them.  We cannot expect employees to make a personal commitment to accountability if their manager has done a poor job explaining performance expectations, or if the performance requirements are unrealistic or not attainable.

Similarly, the organization must develop a climate of trust.  It must show employees that it is committed to helping them grow, to giving them autonomy, to involving them in decision-making, to treating them fairly.  Employees will not make the personal commitment to accountability if they feel that a hammer is about to smash them over the heads the first time they make a mistake.

In the final analysis, the phrase “holding someone accountable” does not quite hit the mark.  It’s not so much about holding people accountable as it is about creating an environment where people want to be accountable.  Only then will organizations see a genuine and long-lasting improvement in performance.

Til next time.

Printer Friendly Version I Back to Information for You