I think of accountability as a subconscious condition that is exists in all cultures and is forever evolving along a spectrum, either for better or worse, depending on the daily decision making process of the culture's leadership. Pushing your team further along the accountability spectrum takes consistent effort. It requires that leaders are capable of having open, honest, and often times difficult conversations while unwaveringly adhering to highest level of accountability themselves. It's positively and negatively affected by the actions we do and don't take, the decisions we make, and the language we use.
I've experienced individuals, teams, and cultures that could be plotted all over the accountability spectrum and I'm convinced that if a group is plotted on the left end of the spectrum then it should be the number one focus of the group's leadership moving forward. In positions of leadership, our ability to manage different personalities, establish Leadership Led accountability, and foster a culture that pushes people to be more Self-accountable will ultimately determine the success we'll have leading the group.
Here's how I think of the accountability spectrum. It's an interesting thought experiment to consider where you, the individuals you work with, and and the groups you lead might be plotted.
Leadership Protectionism - Group Protectionism - Leadership Led - Group Led - Self Led
Leadership Protectionism
This is where the most unsuccessful groups/teams will find themselves plotted on the spectrum. On this end of the spectrum the leaders of the group protects his/her constituents when they break team rules or norms and makes excuses for them when they underperform. This is akin to the over-protective mother storming into the principle's office to get her son/daughter out of detention that was clearly earned or a coach blaming the officiating crew for a loss when they made one bad call throughout a 60 minute competition. Another common form of protectionism presents itself in the form of favoritism. Leaders who give individuals preferential treatment simply because of their talent level, give an inch and get a mile taken from them. These individuals will damage your culture from the inside out, whether they intend to or not. These individuals will never reach their potential because there's no consequences for not putting forth the effort to do so. These individuals will disregard the attempted interventions from your junior staff members, marginalizing their roles, because they know any attempt at law enforcement will fall apart at the top of the chain. I believe this type of culture matures out of a leader's inherent need to be liked by his/her constituents. I think we all want to be liked. Our jobs are easier if the people we work with like us, and this certainly doesn't suggest that our goal should be disliked, but we have to be realistic about what our culture's goals are and the role we play as leaders in keeping our people on track toward those goals. This requires leaders to be disliked from time to time. As long as you don't conduct yourself in a manner that loses your people's respect, you and your team will be better for it over the aggregate.
Group Protectionism
The second level of the spectrum involves a majority or highly influential minority of the group engaging in protectionism. In these types of cultures the members of the team are always covering for each other and looking for ways to keep one of their own from being held accountable for their actions. This is a very real problem in some cultures, and it makes it really difficult for leadership, especially new leadership, to do their jobs well. It needs to be understood by group members that covering the ass of your team member isn't the same as providing them with support. These groups are basically made up of enablers, and non-contributors (that's a bad mix) that feed off of each other. Both allow each other to continue contributing nothing to the greater good and cover for each other every time they violate rules/norms, make a mistake, or underperform. I've learned that I can get a pretty good feel for what kind of lengths a group will go to protect one of their own by investigating situations I already have information for. Some probably think I'm crazy for these mini-sting operations, but they can prove incredibly useful when trying to determine who you can trust in troubled times.
Leadership Led
This is probably the most common form of accountability that exists in teams and groups. The boss or coach carries the majority of load when it comes to holding individuals accountable to group norms and expectations. This is why choosing the right leaders and managers is of utmost importance and why we can witness an almost instantaneous change to a culture after a new leader steps into a role. In order to keep moving cultures further to the right of the accountability spectrum, we have to establish leadership led accountability. No constituents of a group will begin holding each other accountable or themselves accountable unless the group managers are willing to do so first.
Group Led
"That's not how we do things here," can be one of the most powerful phrases muttered in a team or group. I've watched groups grow along this spectrum and when you finally get to a point that the majority of the individuals who inhabit the group are so bought-in and so passionate about the culture being established that they hold each other accountable to rules, norms, and expectations there is a huge load lifted off of leadership's shoulders. This requires that leaders foster a level of emotional maturity in their groups that allows constituents to understand that being held accountable by your peers is something to be grateful for and not something to get emotional about. In a college athletics setting it's difficult to get normally non-confrontational, 19-20 somethings, comfortable holding each other accountable to a higher standard, but once you get a couple on board, an epidemic is inevitable. These trail blazers will give other people permission to do the same and before you know it, you'll have a group bonded by respectful communication that makes up the majority of the people you lead. According to Malcolm Gladwell's book The Tipping Point, fostering this kind of culture requires that you make use of three kinds of people: connectors, salesmen, and mavens. These three archetypes are highly influential to groups of all sizes and can help you establish norms, rules, and expectations quickly and effectively. This, again, speaks volumes to the ability of manager's to properly hire/recruit managers of their sub-groups.
Self-Led
Growing up, my dad would always say, "If you want something done right, sometimes you've gotta do it yourself." This always stuck with me. I didn't know at the time that he was instilling in me a sense of self-accountability. Working with a group of individuals who are self-accountable is the gold standard for groups and teams. Holding oneself accountable takes a lot of practice, but once it's established as a habit, it can be incredibly liberating. I believe there are the two primary reasons young people resist achieving high levels of self-accountability.
- The first is that no mentor has ever instilled it in them. A lot of young people have been told their entire life how wholesome and perfect they are. When these people become a part of large, productive groups, with high expectations for every individual, they're expected to identify, come to grips with, and get to work on all of their limitations. If they've never been told those things could potentially exist, or worse, always had them covered up by someone else, they may be crippled before ever getting started.
- The second reason young people resist being unwaveringly self-accountable is that they don't yet realize that it can set them free. Once you open your mind to the idea that everything that goes right is a result of treating people with respect, making good decisions, and using proper language and everything that goes wrong is the product of treating people poorly, poor decision making processes, and using detrimental language you can literally TAKE CONTROL OF YOUR LIFE. As a self-admitted control freak, once I realized that taking responsibility for my own flaws and limitations was the first step to being in control of whatever life could throw at me, I was free. It's difficult to develop the habit of introspection, but as soon as you lay blame on someone else, you relinquish control. Blaming yourself allows you do to do something about it. If it's not your problem, you can't be the solution. Taking Extreme Ownership and developing high levels of self-accountability keeps you in the driver's seat. Your problem? Your fix. I believe that if we can get the majority of our group members thinking along these lines, our group will be unstoppable.
Closing
I use the analogy of a jar full of marbles to help explain the way I see groups moving along the accountability spectrum. I can't say for sure who taught me this, but it's proven useful for me when considering how our character and leadership is perceived by those we lead. When it comes to accountability and character, for every one thing you do well (actions, decisions, language) you get to add one marble to the jar. Treat someone well? One marble. Make a decision that fosters trust from the majority of the group? One marble. Use language that changes the perspective of the group for the better? ONE marble.
Engaging in behaviors that are detrimental to moving your group or team further along the accountability spectrum, however, costs you a handful of marbles. We know this, intuitively. One poor action or decision can undo a decade's worth of work in establishing a culture of high integrity and character. Make a bad decision? Take a handful of marbles out. Break rules and don't take responsibility? Handful. Waver (even just a little bit) from your group's expectations of accountability to avoid a short term setback? HANDFUL.
I learned from reading Ray Dalio's book 12 Principles for Life that the word integrity, in Latin, is integritas, meaning one, or undivided. We should all strive to determine who we are and simply be that. If we stray from integritas we confuse those we lead or share space with and it can happen in a hurry. Treat people well, but be genuinely yourself and people will adjust. Hold everyone accountable to the same standard and people will follow. Keeping adding marbles to the jar, one at a time, without ever taking out a handful, and before you know it people will be putting marbles in the jar for you.
Good luck. And as always, thank you for reading!
|
No comments:
Post a Comment