This blog posting was one of two I offered for posting on Discuss HR on Thursday 18th August. Take a look to see which one was posted!
On Monday evening, 8th August I was at home in a quiet side-road in the suburbs of South East London when I became aware that there were far more people on the pavements than I am used to seeing. Looking down the street towards the Shopping Centre (which is just two minutes walk away) I was shocked to see a line of police officers carrying riot shields. I watched the scenes that unfolded, which culminated in two cars being set alight before the young men and women involved moved on.
The implications for the organisations we work for have, without doubt, been significant. A variety of organisations (magistrates’ courts, prisons, the police etc.) have played a very direct role in restoring law and order. Retailers have been coping with damage to their property as well as the cost of stolen goods. Diverse employers have had to make decisions about employees who have been identified as participants in the riots.
The rhetoric of politicians has been predictable. Prime Minister David Cameron, following his first emergency meeting, was quick to condemn the acts of rioters, setting up a moral dichotomy between the bad guys and the good guys (those who took part in the riots and those who were in some way affected by their actions or involved in responding to them). Having quickly coined the term “broken Britain” he laid out plans on Monday to “turn around the lives of the 120,000 most troubled families” by the next election. As well as recognising the direct impact on many organisations of last week’s riots I invite you to consider what politicians’ responses tell us about the dos and don’ts of accountability.
Accountability is a tricky term, with multiple meanings and applications. The banking crisis in 2008 highlighted questions of accountability between organisations – the banks to governments, for example, and governments to their electorate. Within organisations, it raised questions of who is accountable to whom – and how to hold people to account. When we get accountability wrong, we mask the problems of our organisations even whilst appearing to take action. This is the “sound and fury” approach to accountability, characterised by vociferous complaints and maybe even decisive action – without ever taking long enough to get to the root causes of a problem or issue. It has its benefits – at least on the surface: in particular, it can protect an organisation’s leaders from the pain and vulnerability that comes with owning their mistakes.
When we get it right, something deeper and more lasting occurs. Accountability is no longer a matter of blame and condemnation when something goes wrong. It is an ongoing dialogue between parties (a manager and employee, one team and another, or members of the Board) about desired aims and outcomes, who will do what and when in order to move towards those desired outcomes, what’s working and what’s not working and what needs to happen next. In an accountable organisation, for example, feedback at annual appraisal time comes as no surprise and is openly shared as the basis of a discussion, rather than given under the cover of anonymity as a stick used to beat the unsuspecting employee.
It seems to me that there is a paradox at work at the heart of every effective system of accountability. When we strip out blame we create the opportunity for a deeper and more productive mutual dialogue because we make it safe to be “in the wrong”. At the same time, in a true system of accountability, each party knows that it may be them who has the hardest lessons to learn. By creating safety for everyone involved we make it possible to engage in the very depth of the dialogue needed to hold people to account. In other words, true accountability is safe – but not the easy option.
If our country’s politicians act with wisdom in their response to the recent riots, they will understand that the louder the sound and fury, the more key people are likely to be let off the hook. I hope they will take time to investigate the complex factors which, together, stimulated the riots and to take the most difficult learning for themselves as well as to mete out justice to others. Closer to home I wonder, how has your business been affected by the riots? What do you see as the key lessons in organisations if they want, truly, to create effective systems of accountability? And what is the role of HR in facilitating accountability in their organisations?