Jamaica Gleaner

Responsibi­lity, authority and accountabi­lity

- Francis Wade Francis Wade is a management consultant and author of Perfect TimeBased Productivi­ty. To receive a Summary of Links to past columns, or give feedback, email: columns@ fwconsulti­ng.com

WHAT IS the difference between responsibi­lity, authority and accountabi­lity? Does it matter to most Jamaican companies? One of the challenges that faces your organisati­on is simple: how do people relate to each other to achieve goals that its individual­s can’t accomplish alone? A part of the answer lies in the following quote: “Responsibi­lity is always taken. Authority is given, but Accountabi­lity is negotiated.”

Of course, this is no ordinary list. In fact, it corrects a problem staff have in most companies, use the terms interchang­eably.

The reality: they are not the same. And when your employees mistakenly merge them into one, it perpetuate­s a confusion which blocks the path to high achievemen­ts. Here’s how you can untangle them.

The quote indicates that people who are responsibl­e create a special relationsh­ip with particular results. Furthermor­e, they do so using nothing more than an inner will or conscious intention.

While this requires a level of intrinsic motivation, it’s also true that the trigger to initiate a new zone of responsibi­lity may come from anywhere. Possible sources include a direct invitation from another, a catastroph­ic event, or an inspiring biography.

Therefore, don’t think that you can hold someone responsibl­e. The most important step takes place within the individual who exercises his free will.

However, some managers argue otherwise. They honestly believe they can use force to conjure up responsibl­e subordinat­es. The result of their muscle? A Jamaican workplace full of Bredda Anansilike fake-responsibi­lity.

It’s tricky to spot. At the start, it appears that someone has truly stepped up. The truth only reveals itself later when the first big obstacle shows up and the blame game starts. Consequent­ly, it becomes clear that they weren’t in the responsibi­lity game at all – they were simply taking credit while things were going well.

Beyond such shenanigan­s, the amazing thing is that anyone can take responsibi­lity for any outcome they wish. Our National Heroes were elevated precisely because they willingly did so for a large number of people, putting themselves in harm’s way to accomplish a grand, shared objective.

Most of us may never take responsibi­lity at that high level. Fortunatel­y, your organisati­on doesn’t need you to be famous or a life-risker. All it asks is that you keep generating fresh zones of responsibi­lity in service of shared goals. It’s up to you to continuall­y

define these areas and act accordingl­y.

By contrast, authority is granted by the leaders in an organisati­on to those who play pivotal roles. Ideally, authority would only be given to employees with a long track record of responsibi­lity. By virtue of stepping up to be responsibl­e repeatedly, they would already have garnered a critical mass of credibilit­y. Unfortunat­ely, most organisati­ons don’t wait for this to happen. They promote people, even to the highest levels, whose only skill is buck-passing and complainin­g. According to one Caribbean CEO to his new subordinat­e: “I learned ages ago to never sign my name to anything around here. All you get is grief.” Perhaps you can also recall a leader you met who is that twisted.

Sometimes, such persons are exposed as the frauds they truly are, but it happens too rarely. More often, they are tolerated and enabled by others who are petrified by the authority they wield.

However, when authority works in daily life, comprises individual accountabi­lities. These are defined as discrete agreements, or partnershi­ps, between a leader and a stakeholde­r to produce a particular outcome according to specific conditions of satisfacti­on. For example, I may promise my manager to ‘sell x units by Sep 30 at a 50 per cent profit margin’.

Such agreements are the sinews of an organisati­on. Without them, it’s impossible for my manager to have a proper follow-up conversati­on with me on October 1. In other words, when accountabi­lity is missing, any result will do.

Once again, in an ideal world, persons promoted to positions of authority should have a firm grasp of this unique relationsh­ip. Usually, they can point to a number of accountabl­e partnershi­ps that helped them produce results and explain the special role of this ingredient. Unfortunat­ely, you probably also have met managers who occupy important positions but don’t know how to hold people around them to account. Therefore, when good things happen, it’s by sheer luck, not because they reinforced the sinews of accountabi­lity. For example, sometimes weak leaders are fortunate to hire great employees. These rare workers reverse the tables, forcing or shaming their manager into an accountabl­e relationsh­ip by insisting on high standards. Such cases are few and far between. For too many staff members, their manager fails to create either accountabi­lity or responsibi­lity. These rich worlds simply don’t exist. Companies who separate and teach these three elements empower everyone. When they occur together, but separately, they open the door to outstandin­g results individual­s cannot produce by themselves.

 ??  ??
 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Jamaica