Tag Archives: accountability

Just a Cover-up

Leave a reply

“What do you mean, cripple my team?” Lydia protested. “I mean, I agree that I shouldn’t force my decision on the group. I need to get buy-in. But cripple my team?”

“No, in this case, buy-in is just a cover-up. This is a team decision with team responsibility and consequences for the team no matter which way they choose. As the leader, if you make this decision for the team, they are no longer responsible and the consequences are no longer theirs. Even with buy-in, when the team suffers the consequences from your decision, you will be to blame. They will take you to the mat.”

Lydia was silent.

“And your team will gain more experience and momentum in avoiding responsibility than stepping up to the plate. As the leader, you will cripple your team.”

Forcing the Issue

Leave a reply

“I cannot believe the way people are responding to this situation,” Lydia explained. “They know the right thing to do, but they are all wimps, now that they have to stand up for it.”

“What is your position?” I asked.

“To do the right thing. I laid out the steps we need to take, who we need to contact and how we need to present the facts. I know it’s unpopular, but it’s the right thing to do.”

“How are you going to persuade the team to take the right action?”

“I’m the leader, so I could just force the issue, take the steps on my own,” she replied.

“And what kind of leadership is that?”

Lydia thought, grinned, then slowly nodded. “That would be tyrannical leadership, I suppose.”

“And if you are a tyrant and force it, then you let the team off the hook. They are no longer responsible for taking action. You cripple them from being responsible in the future.”

Excuses and Reasons

Leave a reply

“When you evaluate his effectiveness, given his resources and his challenges, how does he stack up?” I asked.

Audrey was quick to reply. “No way. That’s the problem. We have a results based performance review system. He is obviously not getting the results we want, but there is always something, some circumstance that prevents him or his team from delivering the goal. And that something, that circumstance always seems to make sense.”

“You mean the excuse that gets him off the hook is the excuse that you believe.”

Time to Step Up

Leave a reply

“I am ready to throw up my hands. I have come up with eight ways to Sunday for our route technicians to do a better job on their service calls. I am ready to do a Flutie drop kick and just let them deal with it.” Russell commiserated, hoping I would be sympathetic.

“Well, I think it’s a good idea,” I said.

“What do you mean?” replied Russell, still looking for sympathy.

“I mean, I think you should call your technicians together and let them deal with it. Look, the problem isn’t that your ideas are bad; the problem is they are your ideas. If you want your technicians to do a better job on service calls, the ideas have to come from them.

“One of the biggest mistakes young managers make is thinking that you have to solve all the problems of the world. You don’t. Spread the burden. You will be surprised at how your technicians will step up to the plate.”

Leadership Charisma

2 Replies

Leadership is a billion dollar business, yet all around us, we rarely see effective leadership. There are books, seminars, groups and programs to build better leaders (that’s the billion dollar business), yet much of that effort is wasted and fruitless.

The effectiveness of an organization is based on its structure and the role of leadership is to design and build that structure. Effective leadership has less to do with charisma and personality, more to do with building an organizational system to get work done.

Structure begins with the founder, a structure of one. There is work to be done and the founder is doing the work. There is always work left over, so the founder hires three or four people. These people do a little bit of everything. The work is organized around the scarce resources of infant structure. At some point the founder realizes the work can no longer be organized around the people, the people have to be organized around the work.

Organizing the people around the work requires that specialized roles be defined, tasks, activities and expected outputs from those activities. This is the emergence of roles.

This organization is no longer a structure of one, but a structure of many. It is not enough for each person to play their role, the roles have to be designed to work together, more complex than a structure of one, a structure of many. And, organizational structure is born.

Organizational structure is simply the way we define the working relationships between people. The two things that must be defined are –

  • In this working relationship, what is the accountability?
  • In this working relationship, what is the authority? Authority to do what? Make decisions and solve problems the way I would have them solved.

And, so the structure of one becomes the structure of an organization. I don’t care about your personality or charisma as a leader. I only care whether you can design and execute the structure, to get some work done.

Communication Problem Only a Symptom

Leave a reply

From the Ask Tom mailbag –

Question:
Hi Tom. In the seminar I attended, you said something about communication not being an issue in an organization, and I was surprised at that, as I believe communication is often a problem in organizations. Maybe I misunderstood. Will you please elaborate?

Response:
Communication breakdowns are often a symptom of a deeper darker problem.  Companies believe they have communication issues, so they conduct a communication seminar that RARELY solves the problem.  Whenever a client reports a communication problem, I start with accountability and authority.  The identified communication problem is a symptom of an accountability and authority problem.  Communication breakdowns can help us locate the problem, but not to resolve it.

Most communication problems are between two people who have to work together, but are not each other’s manager.  This is the dotted line phenomenon on most org charts.  The problem with the dotted line is the undefined accountability and undefined authority.  As managers, we hope the two will be able to figure it out, which is where the communication breakdown begins.  Technically, these are cross-functional role relationships (two people who have to work together, but are not each other’s manager).  When we define the role relationship, we have to define the accountability and the authority in that relationship.

Example –
Would it be a good idea for sales to coordinate with marketing and marketing to coordinate with sales? Yes.
 
But, is the Marketing Manager the manager of the Sales Manager, and is the Sales Manager the manager of the Marketing Manager?  No.  

But, do we require they work together in a coordinating relationship?  Yes.  That sounds great until one begins to complain about the other, and so, we think we have a communication breakdown (or worse, a personality conflict).  What we failed to define in that working relationship is the accountability and the authority.

In a coordinating relationship between the Sales Manager and the Marketing Manager, who each are accountable for their respective budgets, can we require they consult with each other and coordinate their budgets to leverage that working relationship?  Yes.  Why?  

Because we said so, by virtue of a coordinating cross-functional role relationship.  They are required (accountability) to schedule meetings with each other to consult, share information, resources and tactics.  Each has the authority over their respective budgets, but they are required to coordinate.  When we make the accountability and the authority clear, the communication breakdowns disappear almost overnight.

Out of Integrity

Leave a reply

“When we hired Lucas, we were clear about our values,” Alex described. “He’s been here for two weeks and we already caught him.”

“Can you be a bit more specific?” I asked.

“One of our values, integrity,” Alex replied. “We found him skipping the product testing step in quality control. Not on every unit, but he was only testing one in five.”

“How did you find that out?” I wanted to know.

“Easy. We have a reject rate of 20 percent. I know, I know, that’s high, but we had some raw materials out of spec lately, so our reject rate is higher than normal. Lucas’ reject rate was only 4 percent.”

“What did Lucas say?”

“He was proud. Said he thought a lower reject rate was good. Something about sampling. Pointed to his bonus on output. On that, he was right, his output was 16 percent higher than anyone else. But now we have to go back and re-test the entire batch.”

“The entire batch?”

“Yes, his lot output was mixed in with the other lots, so we don’t know which is which,” Alex answered.

“I have three questions for you,” I said.

  • How is your bonus system out of integrity with your quality standards?
  • How is your measurement of output out of integrity with the raw materials problem?
  • How does your management system blame an employee attempting to do his best, when this is really a management issue at a higher level?

    • Done or Done, Done?

    Leave a reply

    “But, Paula promised to finish that report by Friday,” Francine lamented. “Now, I guess I will have to finish it myself, to meet the deadline for the Board meeting.”

    “So, your definition of finish and Paula’s definition are different?” I asked.

    “What do you mean, finished is finished,” she flatly stated.

    “I understand what you mean by finished and I understand what Paula means by finished. Your understanding is that the report is complete, legible, proofread for accuracy, math checked and double-checked. What you mean by finished is published. What Paula means by finished, is substantial completion of the report so she can go home at 5p.”

    “But, on Monday, we were in agreement,” Francine protested.

    “Yes, but you agreed on different states of completion,” I nodded. “What words could you, as the manager, have used to clarify the agreement?”

    The Anabolic Window

    Leave a reply

    The meeting was almost over. Butts in chairs began to shift toward the door.

    “Take this 3×5 index card and write your name on it. Below that, write down the one thing you are going to do in the next week based on what we talked about, today.” The puzzled faces gave way to ideas for action and the writing began. Forty-five seconds later, we started around the table, each in turn, in front of the group, making a public commitment.

    At the end of each meeting, there is an anabolic window that most managers never take advantage of. This window is a short period of time in which growth occurs. Ten minutes later, the window is gone.

    Public commitment to action. Your team was engaged the past twenty minutes in a meeting about improving the work-flow process. At the end of the meeting, you could adjourn and lose the window, or you could stop and ask for a public commitment to action. It could be the most powerful three minutes of the meeting.

    Oh, bring your 3×5 card to the meeting next Monday. We want to know how you did.