My previous post on #noestimates sparked a discussion with a colleague about the need for estimates as a motivational tool to hold people accountable. I could not provide a sufficient response in 140 characters, so here is my reply.

Accountability is an incredibly loaded term just like commitment and ownership (which I will also touch upon here). This often triggers people to avoid these words, but I believe they are powerful and important topics to explore.

I’ve heard this word used in the following contexts:

Project Accountability — Who’s head should roll when this project fails? Individual Accountability —How do I make sure they’re doing their job? Team Accountability — I’m responsible and committed to my team; and Personal Accountability — I’m responsible for my own successes and my failures; I focus on what I can control.

The first two are the traditional view on accountability and are associated with a transactional leadership style (what some might call Top-Down). They are driven from a belief that the absence of external motivators will result in chaos.

Daniel Pink’s model of intrinsic motivation presents three factors drive people: Autonomy, Mastery, and Purpose. Traditional accountability is a method of control, which is counter to the first factor and what I will be focusing on in this post.

“The real problem we have is that people aren’t taking ownership of their work!” said every manager at some point in their career.

Ownership is another loaded word. We want people to take initiative, but we don’t want them to feel attached or protective of their solutions and ideas. We often tell people we want them to take ownership, but it is hard to explain to them exactly what we mean by this.

When I’m having trouble defining something I often find it useful to think about what the opposite is. When I think of someone who doesn’t take ownership I picture them exhibiting the following behaviors:

Gets defensive when asked about their work; Blames external factors when problems arise or mistakes are made; Does not propose ideas of how to improve processes, adopt new technologies or advance technical practices; Hides setbacks and projects an image that everything is alright; and Walks past problems because it is “someone else’s job”

A common motivator for these behaviors is fear. Fear of getting in trouble. Fear of being blamed for mistakes. Fear of trying something new because it might go poorly. Fear of being held accountable.

People are a product of their environment, and an environment of accountability and fear will lead to people abdicating ownership.

So how to we foster an environment where people embrace innovation and take charge to make things better?

Look back at the other two types of accountability. Accountability to your team and accountability to yourself. These are the behaviors we want to foster. These are also behaviors that are self-sustaining and don’t have to be reinforced by management, but they do have to be cultivated.

Team Accountability

A team can truly hold someone accountable when they have collectively committed to how they are operating. I’m not talking about the “Why won’t people commit to a schedule!” type of commitment. I’m talking about the feeling of being committed to the success of your team and a collective ownership of the work you’re doing.

Patrick Lencioni introduced this idea in his book “The Five Dysfunctions of a Team”. He demonstrates that the foundation of this is a feeling of trust on the team where every member feels they can openly disagree and be vulnerable.

The Five Dysfunctions of a Team — http://www.tablegroup.com/books/dysfunctions

If someone on your team is struggling, do they feel comfortable speaking up and asking the team for help? If not, think about why that might be.

When is the last time you demonstrated vulnerability to the team. Do you ever share mistakes you’ve made or something you learned to demonstrate that this behavior is something you value?

When someone is struggling how do you react? Do you respond with curiosity to understand what they need, or do you react with judgement? What values do your actions reinforce?

Without an environment where everyone feels safe to openly disagree you get false-harmony rather than real commitment. Without real commitment to the team, the team cannot hold each other accountable.

Personal Accountability

When you’re giving people work, do you provide them with tasks, or with goals? Do they understand the high level goals that they are trying to achieve are?

How comfortable would you be taking a three week vacation without checking in on your team? If the idea of this stresses you out, ask yourself why this is.

In David Marquet’s book “Turn the Ship Around” he provides a model for leadership that focuses on moving control into the hands of those doing the work.

“Don’t move information to authority, move authority to the information”

Among other things, Marquet stressed the need to develop technical skills and build clarity around organizational goals. This, combined with the autonomy to make decisions will turn passive followers into active leaders.

Conclusion

Traditional views on accountability are founded in a lack of trust for those doing the work. If people are not successful without our presence then we should be asking what we need to be providing them to help them be successful.

Does their environment punish failure, or embrace it as a learning opportunity?

What skills and context are they missing?

True accountability comes from within, and it is our job as leaders to cultivate an environment that reinforces and grows this.