You are using one of your free views. If you are a Links Plus subscriber please sign in. If you would like to become one to continue access to this content, please click here.

The 3 Conditions of Accountability Premium Content

Premium Content: This article is part of Links Plus, a premium ASTD subscription.

Saturday, March 27, 2010 - by Jeff Grimshaw

Send to Kindle

There are three kinds of employees. Saints are always accountable. Sinners aren't. Most employees are save-ables. Sometimes save-ables make good choices; sometimes they don't. They'll consistently perform and do the right things, but only under certain conditions. To create these "conditions of accountability," you've got to understand and address three hardwired human frailties.

1. Save-ables can't read minds. So when leaders fail to consistently communicate clear and credible expectations for performance, they've effectively equipped their save-ables with excuses like these for not doing what's needed:

  • "We do a lot of 'rock hunting.' My boss sends me to look for a rock. When I come back, he says, 'No, that's not the rock I was looking for.' So I go looking for another rock, hoping I get luckier next time."
  • "My leader wants us to get excited and engaged around our new 'strategic direction.' But it's just one of eight things in the past year he's asked us to get excited and engaged about."
  • "My boss always says 'Do the right thing," and we all believe in it. Then we hit a situation where we need an expensive replacement for a customer, but I need three layers of approval, one of whom is out for two weeks. The field is yelling at me: 'We're going to lose this client!' Telling me to 'just do the right thing' doesn't provide real guidance."

2. Save-ables are selfishor at least self-interested. But that doesn't mean that they're bad people. As the father of capitalism, Adam Smith, wrote in The Wealth of Nations, "It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own self-interest." The same principle applies to your save-ables: They won't do the right things because they're benevolent, but rather "in regard to their own self-interest." Save-ables make incredulous excuses when what's expected and what's incented are perceived to be out of whack. For example:

  • "They reward and recognize average performers the same way they reward high performers. So what's the point of killing myself and taking time away from my family to be a high performer?"
  • "The people who create the most drama get the most attention. So now I know what to do if I want my boss to focus on me."
  • "We say we care about customer service, but all they measure and pay us for is productivity. So the people who are actually dumb enough to really care about the customers are penalized for it."

To take away these excuses leaders must know how to create compelling consequences - aligned with the performance and behavior they want to see. As Steve Kerr famously put it, "It's folly to reward A while hoping for B," because whatever leaders reward and tolerate, their save-ables are going to do more of it.

3. Save-ables are prone to self-deception. But it's not their fault. Really. Most humans simply are not hardwired for honest self-assessment because it was not an evolutionary tool helpful for our survival as a species. The quick-triggered defensiveness that enabled our distant ancestors to fend off saber tooth tigers predisposes us to excuse making.

And a little self-deception can go a long way toward helping save-ables rationalize why they deserve credit for successes - or merely for good intentions - whereas mistakes and failures are not their fault. A dose of delusion also comes in handy when the goal is to produce an alibi ("Don't look at me. I didn't know anything about it."), justify a misstep ("I had no choice."), or minimize a broken commitment ("It's only two days late.") or its outcome ("They were a pain-in-the-butt client anyway. Good riddance to them.").

To take away those excuses, and others like them, it's essential to lead conversations grounded in empirical reality. The big insight here is that when save-ables see their leaders indulging in magical thinking, it licenses them to do the same, which leads to excuses like these:

  • "We say we want openness and honesty. But that's just one of the lies we tell ourselves. I've seen them shoot too many messengers of bad news to believe it."
  • "Apparently, there was a problem with my performance, but I was the last one in the department to learn about it. No one gave me the feedback until my year-end review."
  • "They say they want more innovation. But if I come up with a smarter way of doing things, I'll need to get seven people to approve it first. I don't have that much energy."
  • "Everyone secretly knows this initiative is going to fail. But no one is willing to say it out loud."
  • "As a group, we claim credit for our successes but blame our failures on external factors."

In summary, the way to save the save-ables is to take away their excuses. When leaders consistently and effectively create the three conditions of accountability by

  • communicating clear and credible expectations
  • creating compelling consequences
  • leading conversations grounded in empirical reality

their save-ables consistently deliver what's needed. In fact, they often become nearly indistinguishable from the saints. And this makes the sinners very conspicuous and therefore easy to spot and "cast out."

But creating the three conditions of accountability isn't easy. Most leaders need a lot of focused training and development before they get good at it. Otherwise, they tend to make excuses why they can't "take away excuses."

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This article is based on information from Grimshaw's and Gregg Baron's book, Leadership Without Excuses: How to Create Accountability and High Performance (Instead of Just Talking About It), published by McGraw Hill.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jeff Grimshaw is a partner in the firm MGStrategy and an expert in generating accountability and alignment. Over the last two decades he's helped hundreds of leaders apply powerful insights from behavioral economics to improve performance and deliver impressive results. Clients include State Farm Insurance, Kaiser Permanente, Yale University, McDonald's, PetroVietnam, Goldman Sachs, Con Edison, Standard & Poor's, KPMG, and dozens of other Fortune 1000 firms. He has published articles in Strategy and Leadership, Strategic Communication Management, and other journals. For more information, visit www.mgstrat.com .

The 3 Conditions of Accountability

Enter your email address to receive one-time free access to this subscriber-only resource:

Subscribe today to gain full access to ASTD Links Plus Premium Content, or enter your email address above for a sneak peek at exclusive subscriber content.

Already a Links Plus Subscriber? Please sign in to access this resource.

Authored By: