Why Holding People Accountable Doesn't Work

Accountability is a choice. People will only be accountable when they choose to be accountable. That is, people will be accountable when they choose to take responsibility and do what is expected of them because they want to.

I learned that lesson the hard way.

I joined the Royal Australian Air Force after graduating from high school, to become a navigator. At navigation school, I not only learned about how to navigate an airplane from point A to B, I was also required to learn how to be an officer and gentleman!

For the first six months we were treated much the same as any military recruit in bootcamp, marching up and down the parade ground being yelled at by the Sergeant Major, spit polishing our boots and shoes, and having our barracks inspected.

Every morning our rooms had to be perfect just in case the Sergeant Major came by. At first, I really resented this imposed discipline and attempted to take short cuts to make my room look perfect without too much effort. Of course the Sergeant Major had been around a lot longer than I had and knew all the tricks we would try to pull.

Does that remind you of any employees? People who don't want to be accountable will do just what they need to do to stay out of trouble. And, if you're not watching them, they will try to get away with a bit more until you feel like you have to micro-manage these people to ensure the job gets done.

Learning to Take Responsibility
The turning point for me came when I realized that if I chose to clean my room perfectly every day, the Sergeant Major would have nothing to pick on me for. When I took responsibility for the quality of my room, I no longer had any problems with the Sergeant Major, and I actually got a sense of satisfaction from cleaning my room so well that he couldn't find anything wrong.

A command and control style of leadership may have worked for me in the military, but it didn't work for many of my fellow officer cadets who dropped out of the air force, and it rarely produces real accountability in today's work environment.

Commitment or Compliance?
In his book The Fifth Discipline author Dr Peter Senge describes the different attitudes employees can have towards the organization's vision.

  • Commitment: Want the vision to be achieved, and will do whatever it takes to make it happen.
  • Genuine Compliance: See the benefit of the vision; do everything expected of them and more; follow the "letter of the law." They are "good soldiers."
  • Formal Compliance: See the benefit of the vision; do what's expected of them and no more. They are "pretty good soldiers."
  • Grudging Compliance: Do not see the benefits of the vision, but also, do not want to lose their job. Do enough of what's expected to keep the job, but also let others know they are not really on board.
  • Noncompliance: Do not see the benefits of the vision and will not do what's expected; "you can't make me do it!"
  • Apathy: Neither for nor against the vision. They are not interested in it and have no energy to contribute towards it. "Is it five o'clock yet?"
The Sergeant Major's approach did not secure my commitment - more a genuine compliance as I became a good soldier and did what was expected. In fact I resigned from the air force as soon as my 7 years was up. That's not what you want in your organization is it? Good soldiers don't produce what committed employees do, and they are more likely to leave for a better offer.

When you use a control-based approach to holding people accountable, genuine compliance is the best you can expect. You are likely get more formal or grudging compliance, noncompliance (rebellion)or apathy than you want or need.

Gaining Commitment to Accountability
Six months ago the molding department of a small manufacturing company in Michigan was experiencing high employee turnover, decreasing productivity and creating tension between supervisors and staff. There was a lack of commitment within the team and it was more or less "every man for himself" when it came to accountability.

As a last resort, the supervisor called a team meeting to explain the over arching purpose and goals of the department and asked the team to set a productivity goal for themselves. In a matter of weeks the staff achieved the productivity goal, an increase of 22 percent including a significant reduction in overtime.

The previous maximum output of 500 parts per shift for a single operator was shattered by several people producing over 700 parts per shift and cost per part produced decreased by 40% during this time. This is an example of the difference between a "good soldier" and a committed employee. Employee morale is now at an all-time high, and the supervisor's chief complaint is that he is getting more suggestions for improvements than he can handle.

People want to have a say in how they do their work. They need to be listened to. All the supervisor did was treat team members like adults and ask them to help him improve productivity. When leaders give employees no say and tell them what they will be accountable for, they have no ownership in the results and they feel like victims. People have a need to be self-directed, to have a say in what they do and how they do it. Only self-directed people will be accountable.

We as leaders also have a choice. Choose to gain commitment rather than enforce compliance.

PS. Click on this link for an article by Dr. Ralph Colby, co-founder of Integro, that explains why some people are accountable, and others are not. Personal Responsibility Article.

Click here to read our eMail Archive