Responsibility Is Key But Not So Simple

Bill Maw’s new book, The Work-Life Equation: Six Key Values That Drive Happiness and Success, presents a simple and practical formula to drive happiness and success in work and life. Dismissing the familiar, corporate value clichés, The Work-Life Equation focuses on six key values most readers probably learned as kids but have forgotten about in adulthood—or didn’t realize were still apt and relevant. Below is an excerpt from one of the six behaviors critical to self-awareness and self-improvement.

Value #6: RESPONSIBLITY

“The right thing to do and the hard thing to do are usually the same.” – Steve Maraboli

The topic of responsibility is complex. That is why we see or read about so many irresponsible actions every day. I would like to distinguish between three aspects of responsibility:

Legal Responsibility is dictated by law.
Social Responsibility is responsibility with sensitivity towards social, cultural, economic and environmental causes.
Moral or Personal Responsibility is about treating each other with respect and dignity, not gossiping about people, keeping your promises, being dependable, having integrity, being loyal, having humility or being generous. It is about feeling responsible for people or things because we believe it is the right thing to do. It is where we feel that ignoring our moral responsibility would be wrong. It is also about ethics.

Success often comes from doing things for the right reasons. It comes from being accountable, where only the truth sounds like the truth. It comes from being responsible to ourselves and to others.

One Key Theme: Using Common Sense (or Good Judgment)

In 1787, a group of people gathered together to write what would become The Constitution of The United States. It took 100 days to frame the Constitution, and the original document was only 4,618 words, including signatures. It is the oldest and shortest written Constitution of any major government in the world. The framers included many Founding Fathers such as Benjamin Franklin and George Washington. The Constitution was put into effect in 1789 and has been amended only 27 times, the first 10 of which are collectively known as the Bill of Rights. It was meant to be a living document. The brilliance of the Constitution was and still is its simplicity, and it was an incredible example of using common sense for the common good. One example is the constitutional guarantee, that no person or class of persons shall be denied the same protection of the laws that is enjoyed by other persons or other classes in like circumstances in their lives, liberty, property, and pursuit of happiness. The Declaration of Independence states:

AbeQuote

But what is common sense and can it be taught? A 2009 Encyclopedia Britannica article by psychologist and author Daniel Willingham has some interesting perspectives on this. Willingham referred to a book What Intelligence Tests Miss by psychologist Keith Stanovich. Stanovich starts the book by asking us to consider why smart people do dumb things. He uses an example of David Denby, a film critic for The New Yorker. Denby had a divorce settlement looming and decided he needed to make a million dollars quickly. Although he knew nothing about investing, he sold all his conservative investments in 1999 and went all in on technology stocks. He knew this move was not rational. As his losses mounted with the technology collapse soon thereafter, he continued to invest in a vain attempt to recoup his losses. Willingham’s analysis asks, “How could someone [Denby] who likely would score very high in a standard intelligence test, do not just one bone-headed thing, but a whole series of really bone-headed things?”

Willingham’s conclusion is that intelligence tests measure the efficiency of the algorithmic mind. The algorithmic mind processes information, juggles concepts in working memory, makes comparisons and combines them in different ways. What these tests miss is the reflective mind. The reflective mind refers to the goals of the system, beliefs relevant to these goals and the selection of actions to try to get to these goals. One powerful example of this, in my opinion, is how all these brilliant people in the financial world dreamed up the concept of sub-prime mortgages and financial derivatives. They were clearly the result of algorithmic minds. What they failed to use was their reflective minds, which might have considered the vulnerability of these instruments. Many of them were also overly complex, which a lot of algorithmic-minded people like to do in order to make themselves “feel smart.” This was evidenced in 2008 with the failure of Lehman Brothers and a global financial meltdown that adversely impacted millions of people. Clearly poor judgment and lack of common sense came into play. Had there been thoughtful consideration of both the short-term and long-term consequences of their actions, along with some practical wisdom and good sense of that analysis, these disasters may have been avoided. We demonstrate good judgment when we choose worthy goals, set proper priorities, consider the consequences of our actions and base our decisions on practical wisdom and good sense. There are no set formulas and this is a learning process—yes we will make mistakes. Four things to consider are:

Give yourself time to think things through before making a decision.
Listen to your “gut.”
Learn from others.
Keep it simple.

One Key Action: Holding Yourself and Others Accountable

Accountability can be described as the obligation of an individual or organization to account for its activities, accept responsibility for them, and to disclose the results in a transparent manner. These activities often take the form of goals. Whenever I see people set personal goals for the year, I more often than not see goals that are almost “slam dunks.” By that I mean, relatively easy to accomplish. The basics behind good goal setting are not complex. They should be focused, achievable, realistic, measurable, challenging and in-line with the overall goals of the organization and/or individual. Psychologically, however, there can be some challenges to effective goal setting. Ray B. Williams wrote an article for Psychology Today on the topic of why goal setting doesn’t work. Williams states that “our society, at both the individual level and in organizations, has an obsession with goal setting, particularly ‘stretch’ goals or ‘audacious goals.’ We tie goals to accomplishment. In our culture, an individual cannot be considered successful unless goals are achieved.”

Williams goes on to say: “the inherent problem with goal setting is related to how the brain works. Recent neuroscience research shows the brain works in a protective way, resistant to change. Therefore any goals that require substantial behavioral change or thinking-pattern change will automatically be resisted.”

Interestingly, Sim Sitkin, a Duke University business school professor completed a study of stretch goals and found they were most likely to be pursued by desperate, embattled companies that would have difficulty adapting if the goals failed. Yes—I have seen that happen before, akin to a “Hail Mary Route”! Many scholars argue that the price we pay for overly focusing on goals is a loss of independent thinking and personal initiative.

Despite having said all this, goals are still a reality and an expectation of most employers who exist today. They also help frame the path for individuals in their life. I actually like setting personal goals. They keep me focused on continual improvement and development.

I have seen well-organized businesses establish wonderful goal setting processes but then things begin to fall apart. Often, there is poor monitoring of performance, and the goals lay on the side, almost forgotten while everybody scrambles to do their day job. Some goals become less relevant as the business makes course changes and priorities shift. Most often however, key goals get assigned to multiple parties and it becomes less clear who is actually accountable. If things go wrong, people start to point fingers at others and no one is actually accountable. What a joke!

The most important things required to build an environment of accountability are clear roles, team leadership and individual leadership. If roles or processes are ambiguous, people struggle to be accountable. It is critical to avoid confusion about who is doing what.

Ultimately, accountability is the foundation for supporting learning and development. It challenges people and allows them to measure success or even failure in a safe and supportive manner. Accountability should not be a tool for punishing people. If that is the risk, few will step up or challenge themselves. Innovation and risk taking will be lost. How do you feel about the process and level of accountability for yourself, your organization and others? What can you do to make this work better?

“When it comes to privacy and accountability, people always demand the former for themselves and the latter for everyone else.” David Brin.

Finally, remember the quote from Abraham Lincoln: “You cannot escape the responsibility of tomorrow by evading it today.”