« Quick Clicks: Dartboard edition | Main | Delivering Happiness: What Culture Really Is »

Proactive accountability

I don't have any specific recent examples in mind about accountability, but it's a topic I've had in mind for a while and have wanted to get into a blog post, so here goes.

Most of the time when accountability comes up, it does so in roughly this context:

"We need to hold people accountable for their actions."

People say this about politicians a lot. It often gets tossed around regarding CEOs and boards. It comes up in relation to staff and volunteer performance, as well. In general, if you're "held accountable" for something, it's bad news. It means you're the one to blame.

This perspective seems backwards to me. It's reactive. If you're in a fuss about holding people accountable for their actions, it means you likely weren't paying any attention before and during those actions. And that's a problem for an association executive, particularly if you want your staff and volunteers to do actual work.

Instead, accountability should be built into your work from step one. Here are two examples from my experience:

  • In high school, I was a lifeguard at the neighborhood pool for three summers. Every day, the pool was packed with screaming kids and inattentive parents. But in three years, I never had to jump in the pool to save someone. Why? Because my fellow lifeguards and I blew our whistles. We blew our whistles a lot. No running. No diving in the shallow end. Et cetera. In other words, when you're proactive, you reduce the need to ever have to go into emergency mode.
  • On the Associations Now staff, we keep a running Excel file of what articles are scheduled for upcoming issues, deadlines, and who is writing or editing what. We have a weekly staff meeting in which we all have a hard copy of the lineups for the coming few months and we discuss status updates. When my name is beside an article, everyone in the department knows that article is my responsibility, and if I let the article fall through, I know that all of my fellow editors will be fully aware of that. And on the flipside, if I get something in early, everyone else knows that, too. It's all out in the open. (This system was in place before I arrived, so I can't take credit for it. Though if I ever worked on a publication without such a process, I'd install it in a second.)

Neither of these is complicated. They're just simple matters of order, organization, and transparency. They're not revolutionary systems or advanced management practices. They just have to be practiced and maintained every day, not just when things go wrong. (As a sidenote, seeking proactive accountability through transparency offers a bonus positive result: breaking down silos.)

For associations, a significant challenge is ensuring that boards and volunteers follow through on commitments. I'm curious about what proactive methods you use at your associations to build accountability into your work with volunteers or, for that matter, with staff or even with CEOs from the board's perspective. Please share in the comments.

|

Comments

I believe it was an HBR article that talked about how in work groups a designated individual/leader hold others accountable, but on a true team, people hold each other accountable.

In my first association position, the ultimate accountability was the respect and trust we had in each other as peers: you didn't want to do anything that would let down your colleagues.

We need to spend more time cultivating that level of trust, transparency, and interdependency. It's more powerful than any policy.

Great post, Joe! And for me, Jeffrey's comment really picks up an important theme within the larger issue of accountability that you raise: the stronger the relationships, the stronger the accountability.

Our Excel file and editorial meetings work (in my mind) because we respect each other, support each other, and don't want to let each other down--and we all share a commitment to the quality of the publication(s) we work on. Not to mention, if one of us fails to meet our deadlines, the ripple effect impacts all of us. As Jeffrey put it, we're interdependent.

I've seen similar systems work much less well when individuals in the group were isolated from one another, or when particular individuals clearly didn't find the respect of the rest of the group to be particularly important to their lives ...

Thanks Jeff and Lisa. I think Jeff has summed up the underlying theme here better than I ever could. I really like the distinction between a group and a team there.

Lisa, you're right that relationships and culture support accountability, but I think the Excel file and the weekly meetings reinforce it, too. Regular meetings generate regular face-to-face communication, which helps build that level of familiarity and trust among colleagues. Regular meetings could be a drag if they were poorly run, but the Excel file that tracks assignments also provides a structure (or equivalent meeting agenda) to keep us on task and keep the meetings short and sweet.

We also kept an excel spreadsheet of our responsibilities and deadlines (in case I got hit by a truck!); but in addition, I hung a white board on my office wall with weekly and quarterly projects and assignments noted. My small department (I had 3 direct reports) interacted informally every day, and they loved to come into my office and mark through a completed task. More than once I found our CEO staring at the white board with a cup of coffee in his hand. He said it kept him in touch with junior staff members, and the over-arching strategy of our membership/member services/chapter development department. Our employees were justly proud of their accountability record.

Post a comment

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)