The hidden cost of shared accountability.
Overview
Many employees avoid personal accountability despite working in organisations where the actual risk of being fired is minimal. Their search for "shared accountability" removes the individual-level "wins" needed to build evidence-based confidence in one’s abilities. This further undermines personal accountability and drives a negative spiral that results in slow decision making and a lack of organisational agility. Steps can be taken at multiple levels to halt and reverse this by building ‘decision muscle’.
The paradox and the problem
Have you seen this paradoxical behaviour – in your organisation or elsewhere – employees who are unwilling to take risks, ostensibly for fear of the consequences if it goes wrong, in organisations where it’s very unusual for someone to be fired? (One sign you might have this in your organisation, even if you might not think so, is a pattern of “at my / our level, we take accountability; it’s the next level down that’s the issue”.)
When I say “risks”, I don’t mean making a massive investment that might not pay out or a big change in policy or process that could have unintended consequences. I mean something that should be much less risky than that: taking personal accountability for the delivery of specific results within one’s job scope and expected competency. Instead, there is a habitual, almost instinctive, effort to “get more data”, “consider other alternatives”, “make sure everyone is on board”, or something similar that delays the decision. This ensures that by the time a decision is made, there is shared accountability for it: it’s no longer clear who is responsible for the decision – or for any ensuing success or failure.
Viewed from an organisational perspective, that’s terrible – most value creation comes from taking some sort of risk, particularly the risk of pushing a new idea. Beyond blocking innovation and change, this “take no risks, make no decisions” behaviour leads to slow, cumbersome decision-making processes and a lack of organisational agility, as well as difficulty in evaluating (and rewarding) individual capability and talent; difficulty that is so pervasive that it’s often not even noticed.
Many organisations know they have these symptoms, but often don’t see a key underlying behaviour that leads to them. Typical remedies are to talk up the importance of innovation and risk taking, do a project to simplify processes and clarify role descriptions, and create an environment of trust in which it’s “ok to fail”. That might help, but these only address the symptoms, not the root cause. There is a deeper dynamic at work that needs to be recognised and addressed if lasting improvement is to be made.
The hidden cost
When this organisational pattern of shared accountability sets in, something very damaging happens at the individual level: people can’t claim they took the risks or made the decisions. The result? People limit their ‘losses,’ but they also limit their ‘wins.’ Because they aren’t taking personal accountability, people don’t get feedback from the results of their actions that tells them what they are good at. When they come to something new or different (even slightly different) they don’t have reliable, recent evidence that they can handle it. Equally, they don’t have the negative feedback that lets them know where they need to improve or simply avoid. Naturally, they look for reassurance; hence the “more data”, etc. reactions. That all reinforces the organisational pattern of shared accountability, driven by a lack of evidence-based confidence at an individual level.
The root cause
You might wonder, “how does this get started?” Well, decision making is hard. Making a bad decision can be hard; making a good one is perhaps even harder. I don’t mean that just in a metaphorical way. Science shows it takes real effort: mental, emotional, and physical. And employees in most organisations face an increasing pace of change and continuing pressure for higher levels of performance. This means that the “decision load” put on a person is growing, often to a point where it exceeds their level of “decision muscle”. When that happens, it’s understandable that they look – even without realising it – to others to help take the load. As they do, they can start to lose “decision muscle”. That’s hard to rebuild. If you’ve not made decisions frequently and recently, it can feel awkward, uncomfortable, and tiring. You can forget what it is like to push through those feelings to reach a (risky) decision and then act on it. Also, you get used to the feeling of having others share the load. It feels better, but you generally don’t realise what you are losing in the process.
Of course, individuals have different levels of decision muscle: some find making decisions easy, some find it harder. Those who find it easier can get drawn into other’s decisions. They get consulted or added to meeting invites and email distribution lists. You can end up with “the usual suspects” problem – a small number of people who are involved in almost all the major decisions and change efforts.
The solution
So, what can you do about it? I’d suggest considering three things, depending a bit on where in your career and in the organisation you are.
First, if you’re at the start of your career: build your own decision-making muscles. Start small. When faced with an issue where a decision is needed, push yourself to at least reach a tentative “if it were my call” decision, even if it’s not your call or you need for organisational reasons to do a lot of persuading, syndication, and option exploration. Think of it as a “suggestion” perhaps, rather than a decision. See how often your initial call is the same as the final decision – and if you think the decision at the end of the process is better than the one you would have made at the start. Build your own decision muscles and test the degree to which you can handle decision making on your own, then move beyond making “suggestions” to making decisions.
Second, if you’re a bit further along in your career (and maybe at least in the middle of your organisation), start a conversation about this “no risk, no decision” behaviour and its consequences. See if others notice what you are seeing and want to do something about it. Simplifying processes and clarifying role descriptions might be a place to start. And, you could promote the idea of making early “suggestions” for those too stuck to decide. All of this will have a lot more bite if there is a recognition of the individual level cost of overly shared accountabilities.
Third, if you’re well along in your career or near the top of your organisation, aim to re-architect the environment for decision-making. Focus on building the “decision power” of your top team and their direct reports. Are you seeing the “usual suspects” showing up at most meetings and driving the discussion to a decision? Are you actively pushing decision making back onto those whose job is it to make decisions? One powerful step in making this shift is to ask in meetings, “"Whose decision is this?" before any data is presented.
Frustratingly, doing any of these might feel like one of those “stick your neck out” moments that, perhaps even in your organisation, have become habitually avoided. However, if you want ‘wins,’ or the earned confidence from a good track record, then you must make some decisions, even if it feels risky.
Accountability isn't a weight to be carried; it's a muscle to be flexed. What are you going to do?
Building ‘Decision Muscle’
If your team is currently stuck in a "shared accountability" trap, here are four exercises to start with in your next meeting:
The "One-Owner" Rule: For every task or decision, assign exactly one person to be responsible for the result. This prevents the "blurry" responsibility that comes when success or failure is shared by a committee.
The "Tentative Call" Exercise: Before any group discussion about a decision begins, ask every participant to write down what they would decide if it were their call alone. This builds the habit of reaching a conclusion before the "syndication" process begins. It can also increase the clarity about what decision is being discussed.
The "Push-Back" Response: For senior leaders, when a subordinate brings a decision to you, practice asking, "What is your recommendation?" and then simply saying either, "I trust your call" or “How are you thinking about X?” This stops the habit of filtering decisions up the chain.
The Data Deadline: When someone asks for "more data" before making a decision, set a hard "Drop Dead" date for the choice to be made, regardless of new information. This forces the "decision muscle" to work under pressure.
