A culture of accountability makes a good organization great and a great organization unstoppable. ~Henry Evans (author of Winning with Accountability)

“If people would just do their jobs.” That’s a statement I hear frequently. Because managers and leaders are frustrated with things not getting done, lagging priorities, or work being completed “incorrectly” (which could have many different meanings). The statement that follows is typically, “There’s no accountability.” The speaker implies that there are no consequences so that same behavior continues.

Hold on to your hats managers and leaders, because I’d like to flip that perception of accountability on its head. The implication is that “employees aren’t accountable.” However, maybe the real issue or challenge is that managers and leaders aren’t providing what I call, The Rhythm of Accountability^TM .

I’ve spent a bit of time researching what’s been written about accountability. The vast majority of authors focus on “the conversation.” In other words, how to have the conversation once you believe someone needs to be held accountable. In contrast, there is much less written about how to create systems, structures, processes, communication, etc. that focus on building-in accountability to the DNA of the organization. Or, the way I like to say it, The Rhythm of Accountability^TM.

Edwards Deming, known as the father of the quality movement, taught that any time the majority of the people behave a particular way the majority of the time, the people are not the problem. The problem is inherent in the system. I’m suggesting, ironically, that leaders and managers should be held accountable for building an accountable system. And, not be so quick to point the finger at employees.

What does The Rhythm of Accountability^TM look like?

First and foremost, if an organization has a Rhythm of Accountability^TM expectations are both clear and shared. “Expectations” is not referring to the list of responsibilities included in job descriptions. This is referring to all of the expectations that are frequently unspoken but create the foundation for how work gets done. I’ll begin with just two examples (there are many more!).

Meetings. What is commonplace for meetings in your organization? Do you have shared expectations for meetings that support and encourage accountability? Is every meeting required to have an agenda? I know, that sounds like Meetings 101, but people get busy, in a hurry, etc. and many meetings are held without an agenda. Does every meeting have an objective? Is it clear how decisions will be made in that meeting? Is it clear what decisions you are making, what needs additional learning, what needs to be remembered, what action items are to follow, by whom, and by when? Etc.

Feedback. This is not referring to performance reviews. Instead, is asking for feedback practiced in your organization on a daily basis? Examples: What one thing could I do to improve this proposal? What external barrier have I forgotten to address in this marketing plan? Etc.

Recently, at the conclusion of a day-long planning session with a client I asked for feedback—first positive and then constructive. What I heard when I asked for constructive feedback was quite telling, and informative to me as a consultant. I heard literal gasps, and even one loud whisper, “She just asked for negative feedback!” If you’re wondering, yes, this organization struggles with accountability.

If people don’t feel safe asking for constructive feedback, it is much more difficult for them to be accountable. You haven’t given them a Rhythm of Accountability^TM when it comes to feedback.  

What’s your Rhythm of Accountability^TM?

If I visited your organization this week, would your Rhythm of Accountability^TM be obvious? Would I “feel the beat, the tempo, and the pace” when I interacted with employees or sat in on a meeting? Or, would I sense uncertainty, fear, and hesitancy resulting in chaos?

Leadership is enhanced when we are willing to live more in line with our created state of vulnerability by revealing the truth of who we are. ~Curt Thompson

We’re all human. I know, I’m stating the obvious. Even though it’s obvious, it’s also baffling that many leaders exert a great deal of effort trying to convince themselves and others that they are the exception.

I find Curt Thompson’s perspective especially intriguing because he’s a board certified psychiatrist with expertise in interpersonal neurobiology. His view on leadership is from the perspective of how human development and functioning is a product of the relationship between the body, mind, and relationships. What I would call the real science of leadership.

Enabling with Intention

Thompson defines leadership as “enabling, with intention, those who are relationally close, and for whom the leader has responsibility, to flourish.”

Let’s unpack that definition. Enabling—which could also mean facilitating, empowering, supporting—with intention. He’s chosen to emphasize with intention. I take that to mean it’s not something that magically happens simply because of the leader’s “position.” It happens because of focused effort.

The next phrase, “those who are relationally close.” I notice the suggestion of relationally close as opposed to close within a position of hierarchy. Consequently, I take that to mean that in order to lead someone you have to really know them.

The final phrase of his definition, “for whom the leader has responsibility, to flourish.” That doesn’t mean help them to just “get by,” or “check off the duties on their job description.” I think it means to help them do, or become, even more than they thought possible.

Reveal the Truth of Who We Are

With that definition of leadership in mind, Thompson goes on to tell us that “Leadership is enhanced when we are willing to live more in line with our created state of vulnerability by revealing the truth of who we are. And eventually that truth will include those areas in which we don’t have the answers or when we need help. This is especially true when we are in relatively higher positions.”

I realize that for many leaders reading this, that last paragraph may have stung just a little (or a lot). Reveal the areas in which we don’t have the answers or when we need help! Are you kidding me?! This gets back to my initial statement. We are all human. Even. Leaders.

Leadership really does get better when leaders are open about their “created state of vulnerability.”

Accountability Requires Vulnerability

Here’s another paradox. A few weeks ago I wrote about accountability, something that seems to be a challenge in nearly every organization I encounter. A very important part of accountable behavior is getting feedback, asking questions when you don’t have the answers and asking for help. Why should that be any different just because someone has moved into a higher position? Truly accountable behavior, in my opinion, requires vulnerability, regardless of position.

Leaders: Are you willing to live more in line with your created state of vulnerability by revealing the truth of who you are?

Faith is taking the first step even when you don’t see the whole staircase.  ~Martin Luther King, Jr.

I remember my first job out of college and how my boss pulled me aside one day and asked, “Are you comfortable with ambiguity?” Apparently not, given he was asking the question. I didn’t realize it at the time, but I typically only took action when I had certainty about something. It was so natural to me that I didn’t even notice I was doing it. I’m hopeful that decades later I’ve made some progress and am far more willing to take a step forward, with faith.

Synonyms of faith are confidence, trust, conviction, belief, devotion, loyalty, and assurance. Sounds like a list of character traits that describe Dr. King. As I paused this week to remember and recognize Dr. King, I was once again struck by his uncanny ability to articulate a vision—which we can still quote decades later—and his faith to take the first step when he wasn’t able to see the whole staircase.

I’ve facilitated strategic planning processes for many organizations; the process typically begins with developing a vision. Then what happens next fascinates me. We start to develop goals or initiatives or priorities or whatever term you want to use. These are five or so priorities that need to be accomplished over the coming three years to reach their vision. When we start to put a timeline to each of the various priorities and then objectives, a vast majority of the priorities/objectives end up with a timeline to be completed in the next three months and sometimes it stretches into the next year. It’s very rare that anything is identified as being accomplished in the next two or more years.

Why do I find this fascinating?

Well, if the vision can really be accomplished in the next few months then is it really all that visionary? Or, if our vision is really visionary, do we only have enough faith to take us up the first couple of stair steps? When we’ve reached those first few steps, will we keep going? In my experience, this is where I’ve seen many organizations simply stop. They accomplished what they could identify as the first few steps but there’s still a lot of staircase to go before they reach their vision. Do they have the faith to not only take the first few steps but to keep going beyond the steps they can see today?

Many of the individuals and organizations we’ve come to admire are those who didn’t stop working their way up the staircase; even when they had made their way up the steps they could see at the beginning, they didn’t stop there.

They kept going.

The Apple III was considered a complete failure. They went back one step to Apple II, reevaluated their plan to phase it out and continued on with its development. It’s been estimated that roughly half of the major ventures Steve Jobs engaged in simply didn’t pan out. The magnitude of his failures, and his ability to recover from them, demonstrates what can be realized if we keep making our way up the staircase. 

Nelson Mandela spent 18 years in prison, but that didn’t cause him to waiver in his vision. After his release, he plunged himself wholeheartedly into his life’s work, striving to attain the goals he and others had set out almost four decades earlier. He kept going.

We may never see the entire staircase, but if we allow faith to be part of the equation, we may make it farther up the staircase than we ever thought possible.

Leadership is about making people feel safe. When someone feels heard, they feel safe. ~Simon Sinek

In my position I hear things that leaders, managers, HR personnel, etc. never hear. I hear comments like “I can’t tell him what I really think!” “She’s my boss, I can’t just give her feedback.” Consequently, people leave organizations frustrated and never communicate what really caused them to look for another position. Or, instead of employees hearing that they aren’t meeting their supervisor’s expectations, they are gradually (and many times painfully) marginalized until they get so frustrated they resign. [But at least their supervisor never had to tell them what they really think.]

I’ve worked with a variety of organizations from manufacturing to human services. One of the mantras I hear frequently in manufacturing is “safety first,” and rightly so. They are referencing physical safety. Above all else, the number one priority is safety. What if all organizations assumed the same mantra? Only in this case “safety first” referred to psychological safety?

My examples describe the tip of the iceberg. The good news is leaders can create safety. Here is just one, of many, steps to move toward psychological safety.

Leaders must make it a consistent practice to ask for feedback.

Notice I said ask for feedback, not give feedback. Skillfully asking for feedback—especially when it comes from leadership—can be just one step toward building psychological safety. Jennifer Porter in the HBR article How Leaders Can Get Honest, Productive Feedback provides great advice about asking specific questions.

1. Don’t ask, “What feedback do you have for me?” Terrible question! It’s vague and the other person has no idea what you expect (and you do have expectations). This question is kind of like putting a landmine between you and the other person and hoping, praying, they don’t step on it.
2. Ask specific questions.
3. Ask specific questions about events. “What did you hear when I gave my update?”
4. Ask specific questions about possible bad habits. “How often do I cut people off in meetings?” Note, you didn’t ask do I, you asked how often to make it safe for them to provide a truthful answer.
5. Ask specific questions about emotional impact. “How did it feel when you read my email?”
6. Ask specific questions to garner recommendations. “What can I do to build my relationship with Joe?”

I’m guessing a few people reading this are thinking, “Aren’t these questions showing uncertainty or weakness?” These questions are demonstrating an outward or growth mindset (i.e., leadership) as opposed to an inward or fixed mindset (i.e., you looking smart). As Keith Rosen said, “Are you tough enough for vulnerability-based leadership”?

One step to psychological safety.

Leaders stop trying to look smart. Instead, leaders make it a consistent practice to skillfully ask for feedback.

If you pick the right small behavior and sequence it right, then you won’t have to motivate yourself to have it grow. It will just happen naturally, like a good seed planted in a good spot. ~B.J. Fogg

It’s a new year, and that means many leaders are setting goals for the year – personal and professional. In a few months (or maybe even weeks!) many of those goals will be tossed by the wayside. We will have determined, all too quickly, that we will never achieve those goals.

This is because when leaders simply set goals, they fall short!

I have an activity I use with leadership teams following the development of a new strategic plan – chockfull of goals. I go around the room and ask each leader to tell everyone in the room what they are going to do differently in order to help the organization achieve those goals. In other words, how are you going to behave differently. Typically, I get blank stares and most leaders don’t identify anything. Hence, why it’s so hard to achieve goals. We expect a different outcome without actually changing our behavior.

We stop with developing goals and don’t dig deeper to identify and commit to new behaviors. Goals are achieved by changed behavior, not by simply writing down hopes and dreams.

Think about this on a personal level. You can have a goal to lose 20 pounds by June. Even add some objectives, like workout at the gym three days a week. And, you may do just that; but then you’re soon back to the old routine.

Why? You didn’t change behaviors!

Example. To go to the gym at say 6:30am and stick with it, you may need to change your behavior and start going to bed earlier. You may need to shift your food choices and meal schedule so you have more energy early in morning.

Merriam-Webster defines behavior as: “anything that we do involving action and response to stimulation.” What is stimulating you and how are you responding to that stimulation?

Many organizations have a goal around innovation. However, when presented with a new idea in a team meeting (stimulation) several key leaders immediately begin to critique the idea and list all of the barriers, issues, etc. why it won’t work (response to stimulation). If they want the organization to achieve a goal involving more innovation, then these key leaders need to make a change in their behavior. [Note, while this might sound like an obvious example, I’ve seen this scenario happen on numerous occasions.]

If you want to achieve your goals this year (personal & professional), what behaviors do you need to change?  How will you begin responding differently to specific types of stimulation?

“Pick the right small behavior, and sequence it right,” to achieve your goals in 2019.