RSS

Self Versus Others

BY Fast Company staffThu Aug 19, 2004 at 10:23 AM

As part of my consulting work with companies such as HP, Nike, Gap Inc., IBM, Mercedes-Benz, and others, one of the things my team does is examine how to improve the performance of teams -- how they make decisions, how they innovate, how they take ideas from inspiration to money-makers. A lot of our work with teams is getting them to understand how to work together better. Trained in the theory of organizational behavior, I've always been a big believer that improving group dynamics is the key to getting organizations to perform better.

Recently, faced by new challenges in my own company, I hired a consultant to help me personally become a better leader. I chuckled a bit at the time: It's a classic cobbler's children syndrome...my team and I are so busy helping our clients, we fail to help ourselves. So I decided to hire someone to help us help ourselves.

My coach Ken Davidson has spent virtually all his time talking about 100% accountability -- the notion that if you truly want to be powerful in your ability to get results, you have to be 100% accountable for everything in your life. On the surface it seems like a somewhat counter-intuitive concept in a world where we're supposed to delegate tasks to others, lead change, and blah, blah, blah (you know the mantras). But when you dig deeper, the implications are profound: To be great at what you do, you have to be 100% accountable.

Some scenarios:

  • You say something, your team doesn't understand. Who is accountable?
  • Your team isn't getting results. Who is accountable?
  • A new leader you've hired doesn't perform as well as you thought she would, based on the strength of her resume. Who is accountable?
  • A competitor makes a bold move in the market and it throws off the effectiveness of your plan. Who is accountable?

In most of these cases, when you pose these questions, leaders (including myself!) divide the accountability between two parties -- you and your team, your new leader and yourself, the team that created the strategy and yourself. Ken retorts: All the accountability resides 100% with you.

When you start looking at the world through that lens, it profoundly changes your actions. You start to see the world as a place where you can have deep and lasting impact on many more fronts.

As you go through your day today, put on that lens, tell me what you see differently.

Topics:

teamwork, Mercedes-Benz International Inc., IBM Corporation, Gap Inc., Nike Inc., Technology Sector


Recent Comments | 4 Total

August 19, 2004 at 11:24am by Lisa Haneberg

Here, here - great post, thanks. Taking on a perspective, or seeing through a particular lens, can be a powerful way to produce new and better results. The managers I have worked with sometimes resist adopting a particular point of view (I'm 100% accountable) because they get hung up on what they think is ACTUALLY SO. It takes them a while (sometimes forever) to understand that it does not matter what is actually so, because the power resides in taking on the belief.

Also, chasing after THE TRUTH is often a waste of precious energy and time. Great managers focus their efforts on determining ways to get things moving in the right direction.

The question I ask is, "Are your current ways and actions serving you well?" If not, a change in perspective may be of benefit.

August 20, 2004 at 12:15pm by Jeff Nichols

I'm not sure I buy the 100% accountable thing. I've been there and done that, but it's a huge burden to put on yourself. If I'm really accountable for every activity and process in which I have a role, my sphere of influence and activities has to become much, much smaller.

August 23, 2004 at 2:14am by Jeannie Church

Great conversation. I love accountability and all it brings up for people. Jeff, its perfect that you call it a "burden", thats what most people think. Its my experience that accountability, breeds accountability....monkey see, monkey do. Being accountable frees you up to lead authentically. Now, what is authentic leadership? Hmmmm....

August 23, 2004 at 3:54pm by John Tilak

Does 100% accountability mean 100%? I mean, how far does it stretch?

Aren't there some aspects that others would be better off not knowing (not necessarily bad things), and that might even bring results?

I don't know for sure myself. One one hand, I want to be accountable. I've been mumbling the 100% accontability phrase for quite some time. At the same time, I also feel accountability might have its limitations.

100% accountability makes a great theory and I love it. But I wonder if people can actually practise it.