On Delegating Accountability: I

It's often said that although you can delegate a responsibility of your own, you cannot delegate your own accountability. This warning about delegation raises several reasonable questions about delegation. If I'm accountable for Task X, and I delegate Task X to my Subordinate A, am I still accountable for Task X even though I have delegated it to Subordinate A? Can I hold Subordinate A accountable for Task X? If I'm still accountable for Task X after delegating it to Subordinate A, are we both therefore accountable for Task X? How can two people be accountable for the same task?

In this Part I of an exploration of delegation, I'll consider the sources of confusions about what can be delegated, and what cannot. In Part II, I offer guidelines for delegating in ways that are clear about what happens to accountability.

Sources of confusion: context, culture, and delegation

Three concepts It's often said that although you can delegate
a responsibility of your own, you cannot
delegate your own accountabilitythat together define the ethics, limits, and obligations of our roles at work are responsibility, authority, and accountability. Although they are critically important, the precise meanings of these three terms — responsibility, authority, and accountability — depend on the context in which we use them. For example, Responsibility has one set of meanings in the context of criminal law, and another set in the context of organizational governance. Because this dependence on context makes for difficulties for any discussion of their applicability, I'll consider only private (corporate) organizations.

Even with that limitation, asking people to define these three terms exposes some confusion among their definitions. That isn't surprising, because many dictionaries define these concepts in terms of each other. For example, Dictionary.com offers accountable as one of the definitions of responsible, and responsible as one of the definitions of accountable. The problem is widespread enough to have drawn the attention of researchers. [McGrath 2018.1]

Adding complexity are two other factors: cultural idiosyncrasies and the complications that arise when we delegate responsibilities. Cultural idiosyncrasies create difficulties arising from small but important differences in the way people understand responsibility, for example. And delegating creates problems because the act of delegating can lead to changes in the distribution of responsibility, authority, and accountability across the people of the organization.

Three definitions

To illustrate these difficulties, consider formulating definitions of responsibility, authority, and accountability.

Responsibility

According to Dictionary.com, to be responsible is to be "answerable or accountable, as for something within one's power, control, or management." Thus, one's responsibilities include all items for which one is accountable; everything that is "within one's power, control, or management."

Authority

According to Dictionary.com, "Authority is the power to determine, adjudicate, or otherwise settle issues or disputes." Authority is usually conferred within a defined domain, such as a business unit or a field of specialty. Authority thus has a jurisdiction within which it confers the right to control, command, or determine a resolution of issues. The jurisdiction can be limited geographically or in some other way. But in organizations, jurisdiction also has limits in the nature of the issues it can address.

Accountability

According to Dictionary.com, accountability is "the state of being accountable, liable, or answerable." And to be accountable is to be "…subject to the obligation to report, explain, or justify something; responsible; answerable."

Next steps

With these definitions in hand, the next step is to overhaul the approach to delegation. Instead of just designating some individual as henceforth "responsible" for Task X, take explicit steps to redistribute authority, responsibility, and accountability for Task X. And those steps are the topic for next time.   Next issue in this series   Top    Next Issue

Are your projects always (or almost always) late and over budget? Are your project teams plagued by turnover, burnout, and high defect rates? Turn your culture around. Read 52 Tips for Leaders of Project-Oriented Organizations, filled with tips and techniques for organizational leaders. Order Now!

Footnotes

Your comments are welcome

About Point Lookout

Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and found it useful, and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.

This article in its entirety was written by a human being. No machine intelligence was involved in any way.

Point Lookout is a free weekly email newsletter. Browse the archive of past issues. Subscribe for free.

Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout, as an individual or as an organization.

Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in, anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.

Related articles

More articles on Conflict Management:

Teamwork Myths: Conflict

For many teams, conflict is uncomfortable or threatening. It's so unpleasant so often that many believe that all conflict is bad — that it must be avoided, stifled, or at least managed. This is a myth. Conflict, in its constructive forms, is essential to high performance.

Overtalking: III

Overtalking other people is a practice that can be costly to organizations, even though it might confer short-term benefits on the people who engage in it. If you find that you are one who overtalks others, what can you do about it?

Anecdotes and Refutations

In debate and argumentation, anecdotes are useful. They illustrate. They make things concrete. But they aren't proof of anything. Using anecdotes as proofs leads to much trouble and wasted time.

Impasses in Group Decision Making: IV

Some impasses that develop in group decision making relate to the substance of the discussion. Some are not substantive, but still present serious obstacles. What can we do about nonsubstantive impasses?

Covert Obstruction in Teams: II

Some organizational initiatives enjoy the full support of the teams responsible for executing them. But some repeatedly confront attempts to deprive them of resources or to limit their progress. When team members covertly obstruct progress, what techniques do they use?

See also Conflict Management and Conflict Management for more related articles.

Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout

Coming September 4: Beating the Layoffs: I

If you work in an organization likely to conduct layoffs soon, keep in mind that exiting voluntarily before the layoffs can carry significant advantages. Here are some that relate to self-esteem, financial anxiety, and future employment. Available here and by RSS on September 4.

And on September 11: Beating the Layoffs: II

If you work in an organization likely to conduct layoffs soon, keep in mind that exiting voluntarily can carry advantages. Here are some advantages that relate to collegial relationships, future interviews, health, and severance packages. Available here and by RSS on September 11.

Coaching services

I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenyrWpTxHuyCrjZbUpner@ChacnoFNuSyWlVzCaGfooCanyon.com or (650) 787-6475, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.

Get the ebook!

Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:

• Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, )
• Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, )
• Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, )
• Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, )
• Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, )
• Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, )

Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline? Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500-1000 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info