MANAGING BY ACCOUNTABILITY

MANAGING BY ACCOUNTABILITY

What Every Leader Needs to Know about

Responsibility, Integrity—and Results

M. David Dealy
with Andrew R. Thomas
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Dealy, M. David.
Managing by accountability : what every leader needs to know about
responsibility, integrity–and results / M. David Dealy with Andrew R. Thomas.
p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 0–275–99332–9 (alk. paper)
1. Management. 2. Responsibility. 3. Business ethics. 4. Leadership.
I. Thomas, Andrew R. II. Title.
HD31.D377 2007
658.4
092–dc22 2006028566
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data is available.
Copyright © 2007 by M. David Dealy and Andrew R. Thomas
All rights reserved. No portion of this book may be
reproduced, by any process or technique, without the
express written consent of the publisher.
Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 2006028566
ISBN: 0–275–99332–9
First published in 2007
Praeger Publishers, 88 Post Road West, Westport, CT 06881
An imprint of Greenwood Publishing Group, Inc.
www.praeger.com
Printed in the United States of America

The paper used in this book complies with the

Permanent Paper Standard issued by the National
Information Standards Organization (Z39.48–1984).
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
 To Rob Krebs,
Thanks for teaching me about accountability . . . from
all sides.
 Contents

1 The Mandate of Accountability 1

2 The Relationship between Accountability and
Responsibility—and Blame 11
3 The Great Accountability Mistakes 21
4 Set Your Personal Expectations Higher Than
Those Around You 31
5 Live the Integrity Imperative 41
6 Treat Accountability as a Verb, Not a Noun 51
7 Accept Inevitable Change and Conflict
and Accountability’s Role 59
8 Help Others Around You to Develop Personal
Accountability 69
9 Putting It All Together 81

Notes 85
Recommended Reading 87
Index 89
 Chapter 1

The Mandate of
Accountability

Watch your thoughts; they become words. Watch your words; they
become actions. Watch your actions; they become habits. Watch your
habits; they become character. Watch your character; it becomes
your destiny.
Frank Outlaw

ONE OF MY FIRST JOBS in the railroad industry was as super-

intendent of a terminal in the western United States. I was viewed
by my superiors as an up-and-comer and given a responsibility
that was normally held for people who had been in the business
for at least fifteen years. I was told by my boss that the situation
where I was going would be rough and chaotic. When I first as-
sumed my duties, I was shocked to find things were much worse.
The inventory was strewn everywhere. Any administrative activity
was a hindrance, not a help. Morale among the team was low. In
short, things were in real, real bad shape.
After a few weeks of trying my best, I believed progress was
being made, although slowly. Then one day, unannounced, I got
a call from my boss that said the “Big Boss” was coming in the
2 MANAGING BY ACCOUNTABILITY

next day for a visit. Scared and excited, I made every effort to put
on a good show for the visiting VIP.
From the moment he arrived, it was clear to the Big Boss that
things were on the verge of spinning out of control. Every item he
asked to see was even less impressive than the previous one. After
exasperatingly observing more and more disorder, the Big Boss
finally turned to me and said, “Dave, tell me what I’ve witnessed
here is just the product of a bad day. Assure me that yesterday
things were better. And, that if I were to come back tomorrow, I
would see an improved operation.”
“No,” I said. “It is clear things here are not running very well.
Yesterday was a bit worse than today and I can only hope tomorrow
will be better.”
I continued, “I realize it is my responsibility to run this opera-
tion and that the buck stops with me. I can only promise you that
I will do my best to improve things.”
His silent response was most disconcerting, as I was now firmly
convinced that my future with this company was ruined.
After the traditional dinner that night and a brief meeting the
following morning, it was time for the Big Boss to depart. At the
send-off, he pulled me aside and put his arm around me. He told
me he was extremely happy with what he saw during his visit. The
Big Boss then said something that has stuck with me the rest of
my life:

Dave, I can train almost anybody to run a railway yard. Inventory

management and administration are processes that are important,
but they can be taught and learned. However, I cannot teach
anyone how to hold themselves accountable.

At its core, accountability is really the responsibility to act.

And, based on my nearly thirty years in industry, accountability
is something that must first come from within. Dishearteningly,
 The Mandate of Accountability 3

however, this is many times the opposite of what is happening

today in corporate America.
Now don’t get me wrong. I understand that accountability is
certainly in vogue today. Everywhere we find people screaming
for it. Everyday more and more companies are signing up to the
challenge of improving and communicating with their stakehold-
ers, yet the same questions seemingly keep coming back again and
again:

r Why do we have to go through all this change?

r When is someone going to train me?

r Who dropped the ball?

r Why can’t they communicate better?

r When is that department going to do its job right?

r Who’s going to solve the problem?

r When am I going to find good people?

r Why don’t they share the vision?

r Who’s going to clarify my job?

Dishearteningly, when we do get accountability, it usually is a

watered-down version of what is really needed. Moreover, those
entrusted with responsibilities often wait for some third party
or outside mechanism to do something before accountability is
unleashed. In some cases it may be Congress, the media, the
legal department, Wall Street, or some other entity that forces
accountability.
This is not to say that formal accountability programs are
wasteful or have no place within society. They play an important
role. And we’ll talk about some in the later pages of this book.
4 MANAGING BY ACCOUNTABILITY

Nevertheless, it is ultimately the individual who holds themselves

to the highest standard first—without waiting to be told, pushed,
or prodded to accountability—that leads the best.
James McNerney, the former Chairman and CEO, 3M Co.,
and now CEO of Boeing Corporation, is undoubtedly one of the
stars in the business world. His ability to lead an organization on
the principles of personal integrity, accountability, responsibility,
and results are legendary. Here are some of McNerney’s words of
wisdom as they relate to what managers must do when it comes
to holding themselves to the highest of standards:

The fact is, demands on business leaders have increased expo-

nentially. Leadership development is the single most important
element to sustained success. We believe that good leaders start
with the premise that very often the most relevant knowledge
exists either at the bottom or outside their organizations. And
the leader’s task is to encourage people to bring that knowledge
forward, learn from it and act on it.1

Those who successfully manage by accountability viscerally

know that external rules cannot substitute for character. That
holding oneself accountable is an acquirement—like music, like a
foreign language, like poker. Nobody is born with it. Managing by
accountability evolves over time within us. Accountability offers
something better than success. It provides a measure of whether
you are doing the best you can in the circumstances at hand.

So Where Did This All Start?

The word accountability in English comes from the fourteenth-
century word accounts, meaning a record of money received and
paid. King James II of England was the first to publicly use the term
 The Mandate of Accountability 5

accountability. In 1688, he said to his people, “I am accountable

for all things that I openly and voluntarily do or say.” In short,
the word means being answerable for your actions. It does not
necessarily mean you will succeed. James lost his throne within a
year of making his pledge.
It is because of human nature that we have such a thing as
accountability. People are not so committed to a cause that they
all just naturally do what they should. Organizations would al-
ways be needed (even in a utopian society) in order to work out
group consensus on things. But they are needed for more than
that. Because of human nature, you cannot count on each mem-
ber leaving a meeting and all carrying out their responsibilities
faithfully. People forget. They get sidetracked. They lose interest,
slack off, and just plain shirk their responsibilities. So that is where
accountability comes in.

But Here’s a Problem . . .

How rarely do you hear someone in any arena of society vol-
untarily step forward early in any form of catastrophe and say, “X
was my fault! That was my responsibility! I am accountable for
this failure! I am to blame! And this is how I am going to fix it!”
Such happens so rarely that our society is quite skeptical if such
acknowledgments occur.
In our society, it is many times considered foolish to acknowl-
edge responsibility and accountability. To do so is to open one’s
self to law suits and perhaps criminal charges! Certainly, there are
many relevant factors in any disaster. Consider how we frequently
approach catastrophic happenings. “Who will ‘take the fall’ for
this?” “Who will we make the ‘scapegoat’?” “Where will we place
the blame—on a person or a circumstance?” “How will we manage
damage control?”
6 MANAGING BY ACCOUNTABILITY

This is also quite evident in the most personal of matters. For

example, when a marriage fails, frequently she says, “It is his fault!
If he would change Y, we would have no serious problems. Our
marriage has failed because he refuses to accept his responsibility!”
He frequently says, “It is her fault! If she would change Z, we
would have no serious problems. Our marriage has failed because
she refuses to accept her responsibility!” In matters of personal
relationships, we are quite adept at giving 100 percent blame to
someone else.
Thus, rather than admitting “my” part in the matter, we learn
to evade any sense of blame. We see this in our children from a
very early age. They blame the dog for eating their homework,
somebody sleeping in the house for why they couldn’t clean their
room for fear of waking them up, or the “magic man” who empties
the orange juice carton and puts it back in the refrigerator instead
of throwing it away.
Clearly, every situation is unique and should be approached as
such—few things “are true of everyone” in a given situation. Yet,
when a person dies from cancer caused by smoking, are tobacco
companies 100 percent responsible? Was individual choice in no
way responsible? Was the person powerless to make a choice? Who
is accountable?
If drinking destroys my liver, can 100 percent of the blame
be put on the brewery? What role did individual choice play in
producing a horrific consequence? Do individual “rights” mean it
is the responsibility of a government agency to protect me from
every situation in life? Who is accountable?
Certainly, these are complex questions. Never is justice done in
any situation by oversimplifying the matter. For sure, no one or no
group has “a license” to ignore human well-being by producing a
dangerous product designed to exploit human addiction. No one
or no group has the right to reduce a woman to a “thing to be used”
and violently disregard her person. Surely, each person should be
 The Mandate of Accountability 7

respected as an individual. The objective of these questions is not

to suggest otherwise.
The matter to consider is this: choices and our decisions pro-
duce consequences. When bad consequences result from a choice
made, we are not served well by seeking to absolve ourselves or
others through trying to place 100 percent of the blame on other
people or the circumstances. If that is the course we choose to
take, then (1) we learn little or nothing from experiencing the
consequence and become likely to make the same mistake again,
(2) those around us learn little or nothing positive from the ex-
perience except that we are not to be completely trusted, (3) our
ability to lead is seriously weakened, and (4) bad things are bound
to happen.
In 1995, the oldest bank in England that preached integrity and
accountability as its mantra for decades, announced it was seeking
bankruptcy. It lost nearly $1 billion in a stock gamble. At the
time it went under, it held over $100 million in assets for Queen
Elizabeth. A year earlier, the chief trader at their Singapore office
started betting some very big money on Japan’s stock market. He
made a lot of money for the company, but then an earthquake hit
Kobe, Japan, and in January 1995, the stock market took a severe
nosedive.
Thinking it was a very temporary loss, the trader started dou-
bling up on his gambling, hoping to make very large sums when
the market rebounded. Instead of the bank cutting its losses,
it just kept pouring money into the Singapore exchange and
their employee would just use it to bet more on the market.
They sent nearly $900 million to this man, and he, in turn, lost
it all.
How could one twenty-eight-year-old employee in Singapore
lose nearly a billion dollars and ruin the oldest and most influential
bank in England? It all boiled down to a lack of supervision. Who
was accountable?
8 MANAGING BY ACCOUNTABILITY

A Culture of Accountability in a World of Teams

For employees to be accountable there must be an environment
and a culture of accountability, and that comes from those above
them. Nevertheless, the reality of business today is that many
organizations tend to favor a horizontal management structure
over a vertical one. To deal with the complexities of global pressures
and real-time expectations, matrices and ad hoc structures are
often intertwined. Folks from across the organizations become
members of teams where roles and responsibilities are temporary
and lines of traditional management structures are blurred.
Many organizations hope—somehow, some way—that in these
kinds of situations, the best outcomes will be reached through
mutual accountability. The result is usually a complete lack of
accountability, with decisions being dominated by stronger per-
sonalities and conflict avoided.
Conflict is inevitable in an organization; knowledge workers
with strong personalities and opinions are going to clash. A leader
needs to be aware of this and understand how his or her organiza-
tion is going to deal with it. Accountability is where it begins. Far
too often, however, managers focus on trying to maintain a happy,
family-based culture. They fail to realize that even functional and
happy families disagree and argue.2
Reaching conclusions in a team through wide consultation is
important, but eventually someone needs to own the process for
each decision—experience has shown that to reach an optimal
decision an individual needs to be held viciously accountable.

What This Book Is About

Despite the multitude of theory and opinion that an organi-
zation is a reflection of its people, ultimately an organization is
a reflection of its leadership and their management methods. My
 The Mandate of Accountability 9

earlier books on what constitutes a great boss and understand-

ing how to take advantage of inevitable change each touched on
the issue of accountability in a number of ways. In the following
pages, I want to illustrate in greater detail how the role of personal
accountability has shaped my career and that of many success-
ful leaders whom I know. Also, I want to help guide you away
from some of the most common mistakes that get made by those
well-intentioned leaders who seek to manage by accountability.
Simply saying “I am accountable” and trying your best is not
nearly enough. It is only the beginning. It is the beginning of
a much larger process that will lead to greater effectiveness and
results as a leader. Claiming accountability for something that has
gone awry requires a personal commitment to see things through
to a more positive outcome. This is not often easy, nor pleasant.
Neither is being a leader.
In short, if we don’t manage by accountability, we end up in
the blame game and nothing good ever comes from that. On
the other hand, if accountability is the benchmark and claimed
when a situation requiring it arises, then there is good chance
that improvements can be implemented and the problem ulti-
mately solved. This requires action. And it can only begin when
we truly understand the relationship between accountability and
responsibility.
 Chapter 2

The Relationship between

Accountability and
Responsibility—and Blame

Responsibility is to keep the ability to respond.

Robert Duncan

FEBRUARY 1, 1996, IS A DAY that will remain permanently

seared into my mind, heart, and soul. I was in Springfield, Mis-
souri, to perform a typical field operations audit. My pager went off
just about the time I was walking into our office building. I called
our operations center in the Chicago suburb of Schaumburg and
spoke with Danny Reynolds, our General Superintendent. The
conversation started out bad and got worse.

Dave, I hate to be the one to have to tell you this, but one of our
trains just made an emergency call from Cajon Pass. They said the
train was out of control going down a steep grade and they were go-
ing to jump. That’s all we know. We have alerted the police and am-
bulance teams and they are responding. All we can do now is wait.

This was unbelievable. How could this be happening? We had

just had a runaway train accident at this same location a year
12 MANAGING BY ACCOUNTABILITY

earlier. One of our trains had lost its air brakes and had collided
with a loaded coal train that was stopped ahead. The engineer
and conductor had jumped seconds prior to impact at a speed we
estimated was in excess of thirty-five miles per hour. The collision
was horrific. The locomotives were engulfed in flames.
About fifteen minutes had passed since I had first spoken with
Danny. I called him back on the hotline and I could sense a great
degree of gravity in his voice. “We lost contact with the crew.
We have received reports from the Sheriff that there was a large
explosion with a big fireball. It looks like the entire train left the
track and is in a pile. Our crew members are missing.”
I quickly chartered a jet and flew the three hours to Ontario Air-
port in Southern California. When I finally arrived at the scene,
I learned that the engineer had been rescued from the burn-
ing locomotive by nearby ranchers. The bodies of the other two
crew members had been discovered near the wreckage. They were
dead.
The entire site was closed to all but emergency response per-
sonnel. Just like the previous year, we had the interstate closed.
The tracks run parallel to Interstate 15, which is the main route
between Los Angeles and Las Vegas. Interstate 40 breaks off east of
there at Barstow. This forms one of the major connections between
the huge population mass of the Southwest and the Midwest. Our
accident had it shut down. We were on national news and things
were getting real tough. Moreover, I had seemingly all of the
state and federal agencies—including the National Transporta-
tion Safety Board (NTSB), the Department of Transportation,
and the California Public Utilities Commission—coming down
on me trying to conclude what had happened.
Our engineer had been badly injured. We all wanted to talk to
him, including the news media. To make matters worse, immedi-
ately after a closed-to-the-public NTSB briefing, a local politician,
 The Relationship between Accountability and Responsibility—and Blame 13

looking only to get his mug in front of the cameras, announced to

the press that the engineer was at fault. His comments, although
great fodder for the cameras, were disingenuous and simply not
true.
The media feeding frenzy was insatiable. We had to move the
engineer to three different hospitals and ended up checking him in
at a fourth under a false name. We were able to speak to him long
enough to understand that he was not at fault, but the fire with
the media had already been lit. And, like the four locomotives and
fifty-seven freight cars up on the mountain, it was blazing.
It is standard practice in major train wrecks not to comment
on the cause. Many times it takes days to put the pieces together
and by that time it is no longer news. We are used to saying that
the cause is under investigation and letting the story die a natural
death below the fold on page 10. However, this one was not going
away. The interstate was closed for almost three days. Hundreds
of thousands of commuters were inconvenienced. Days later, we
were still front page and getting thirty seconds at the top of every
hour on CNN.
The chief concern for me was our engineer. He was being
blamed for an accident that killed two of his fellow employees, shut
down a major highway artery for three days, and posed a serious
contamination threat to one of America’s largest metropolitan
areas. Something needed to be done.
Despite the fact that standard procedure and jurisdictional pro-
tocol were against me, I believed that I had to act. I rented a ball-
room at a nearby hotel and assembled all of our employees, their
families, and the union leadership. I told this group that while the
media had blamed our engineer, we had determined that he was
not at fault. In fact, on the basis of what we knew at the time,
we concluded that he had done everything he could have to stop
the train. Just like the wreck that had occurred just over a year
14 MANAGING BY ACCOUNTABILITY

before, something had caused the train’s brakes to fail on all but
the cars nearest to the locomotives. This was most disconcerting,
I explained, because in this case the train was equipped with a
new piece of technology that should have allowed the brakes to
be set from the rear of the train using a radio-controlled device.
For some reason or reasons, unknown at that time, the new device
was not functioning properly.
I stated repeatedly that our train crew was not responsible. We
were not going to blame them. I related that our prayers were
with the engineer and his family as well as the families of the two
crewmen fatally injured in the accident.
In the immediate days and weeks following the accident, we
attended funerals, picked up the wreckage, ran off the back-log of
train traffic, cooperated with the NTSB and the various federal and
state agencies, dealt with congressional investigations, and worked
hard on developing a plan that would prevent this mistake from
ever happening again.
On top of all that, the U.S. Department of Transportation
(DOT) created its own committee to study what had happened
and reduce the likelihood of something like this happening again.
The committee consisted of myself, a representative from the
United Transportation Union, and a DOT employee.
As time went by and we began to retrace the events one by one,
it became clear that a set of management decisions years before had
created the environment that ultimately led to this tragic series of
events. In other words, the management of the railroad, of which
I was a full-fledged member, was to a large extent responsible for
what had happened.
My time came a couple of years after the accident when I was
sent to Seattle to address 4,000 union members and tell them
why it had happened. Already a bit nervous, needless to say, I
walked into the hall and got even more concerned when I saw
open microphones scattered among the audience. In my mind,
 The Relationship between Accountability and Responsibility—and Blame 15

I was imagining an emotional union member using the mikes

to stir up his brothers to the point where I might be vocally or
physically shredded.
I walked up to the podium at the front of the room and waited
what seemed like eternity for everyone to calm down. Then the
room went completely silent. I cleared my throat and began to
speak.

In most railroad accidents, it is usually a broken signal, a poorly

functioning wheel, or a track displacement that is the root cause.
However, in the Cajon case, it wasn’t any of these. It was in
fact broken management. And, as the accident happened on my
watch, I am accountable. It is now my responsibility to take action
and fix the problems that led to the crash. I ask you for your
help.

I paused and the silence was truly deafening. At the same time, a
guy in the back of the room walked over to one of the microphones
and began to speak.
He said, “In all the years I have worked for the railroad, this
was the first time I have ever heard someone from management
accept responsibility for a mistake.”
He then asked the others in the room to join him in a round
of applause, which spontaneously turned into a standing ova-
tion.
It is critical to understand that, ultimately, people account, not
intangible things like “corporations” and “governments.” For every
important responsibility, there is accountability. Accountability is
the obligation to answer for the discharge of responsibilities that
affect others in important ways. The answering is for intentions
as well as results. Whenever someone has an important responsi-
bility, they have an obligation to answer to stakeholders for their
decisions.
16 MANAGING BY ACCOUNTABILITY

The Three Options When Things Go Awry

In my nearly thirty-year career at almost all levels of the industry
where I work, it seems that there are three possible ways events
can unfold when something doesn’t work out right:

Blame

This could be the result of the weather or something else com-

pletely outside of the control of those doing the job. Most of the
time, however, blame gets directed to the wrong place: other peo-
ple. It is what children do. And far too many adults as well. It is a
waste of time. All it does is prolong the agony and exacerbate an
already bad situation.
The federal, state, and local response to Hurricane Katrina is a
great example of the blame game in action. Although everybody
knew the storm was a potential Category 5 and it was headed to
New Orleans—where it was widely known for decades that the
levees around the city could only withstand a Category 3—leaders
at every level failed to be prepared for such a scenario. I remember
watching television—2 days after the storm thrashed the Gulf
Coast while corpses were still floating in the streets—and hearing
city, state, and federal leaders and their teams of handlers begin to
set the stage for the blame game.
The city folks said the federal folks didn’t do what they were
supposed to. The federal leaders said the state leaders blocked every
effort for their assistance. They said we couldn’t have imagined the
levees were going to break. (I really like it when someone blames
the lack of imagination. That’s a good one.) And it went on and
on and on . . . ad nauseum.
So while the amount of human suffering was in many ways
increasing across the disaster zone, those who had the authority,
 The Relationship between Accountability and Responsibility—and Blame 17

resources, and responsibility to do something positive to help

alleviate the situation ended up spending an inordinate amount
of time playing the blame game.
A few months later, I remember watching Super Bowl XL
between the Seattle Seahawks and the Pittsburgh Steelers. Not
a fan of either team, I, like tens of millions of others, tuned in
to watch for the spectacle of it all—and the commercials. As the
game unfolded, it was clear that Seattle was not doing very well in
its execution. Moreover, there were also some questionable calls
by the referees that seemingly went against them. However, after
the game, Seattle coach Mike Holmgren and many of his players
focused their comments squarely on the referees and blamed the
officials for their loss by a score of 21–10.
It appeared to me as absurd as it was shameful. Certainly the
officials made at least one indisputable mistake. Matt Hasselbeck’s
tackle of Ike Taylor was not an illegal below-the-knee block. This
and other uncertain calls had Coach Holmgren and his players
frenetic after the loss.
Interestingly, they were quick not to mention the fumble by the
Seahawks receiver that was called an incomplete pass. Pittsburgh
was the only other team that could have recovered from that
fumble. And Seattle’s folks didn’t bother to detail the two field
goals they missed, how they botched the end-of-the-half time
management, and their three holding penalties. Nor did they
discuss their poor play calling. Was that the officials’ fault as well?
Losers make alibis and play the blame game.
This was in stark contrast to what I remember Greg Norman
doing after his monumental collapse at the 1996 Masters Golf
Tournament. Six strokes ahead at the start of the final day, Norman
had what almost everyone believed was an insurmountable lead.
It was going to be a great day for the world’s number one ranked
player as he marched to his first major championship. . . .
18 MANAGING BY ACCOUNTABILITY

After eleven holes, the insurmountable had been wiped out

and then the whole golfing world watched Norman as he self-
destructed by going into the water for double bogey fives on both
the twelfth and sixteenth holes. Nick Faldo held his nerve and
ended up winning by an incredible five strokes. It was the biggest
last-day turnaround in the sixty-year history of the tournament.
Norman carded a sad 78 and was just barely able to hang
on to second place by a stroke. It was the eighth time Norman
had finished as a runner-up in golf’s four major championships.
Golf fans will also recall how Norman lost some other major
championships that looked like were going his way. He was the
one in the lead when Larry Mize dramatically chipped in at the
1987 Masters, and Bob Tway holed his bunker shot to take the
1986 PGA title.
At the press conference after the tournament, I remember
watching the world’s number one player not mince words about
his display and avoid the blame game.
“I played like s∗∗∗ ,” were his first words.
“It was all my mistakes. I didn’t do the right things and Nick
played great. I got a good old arse-whipping.”
“Of course, I am disappointed. I put all the blame on myself. I
am a winner, but I just didn’t win today.”

Accountability
To me, accountability is best encapsulated as follows:
“It happened on my watch, so therefore I am accountable.”
If, like Greg Norman and unlike the Seattle Seahawks, we
choose to avoid the blame game, the path to accountability be-
comes open to us. This is often where the “tipping point” lies
when something is not quite right. Do we stay in the gutter
and accomplish nothing or do we try to make a bad situation
better?
 The Relationship between Accountability and Responsibility—and Blame 19

Accountability is the realization and recognition that I am ac-

countable for the results and outcomes. If accountability becomes
my response to a particular situation, then there exists the possibil-
ity to right the ship and effectively solve the problem or problems
that caused the situation. If the blame game, finger pointing, and
name calling take over, the situation will further degenerate into
a battle for self-survival. I will accomplish nothing and further
reduce my effectiveness as a leader.
But as I said in the last chapter, stating accountability simply
for the sake of avoiding the blame game is itself destructive. Real
leaders who manage by accountability also know that there is a
responsibility to do something to make things better and achieve
results. And that is the other direction to head when things get off
track.

Responsibility

After assuming accountability (“It happened on my watch”),

the leader is now front and center in solving the problem and
making sure it doesn’t happen again. This means action!
From where I sit, a lot of the people who are in positions of
authority are afraid to make decisions. They don’t want to screw
up, be embarrassed, or displease their boss. So they do little or
nothing. And you know who sees that clearer than anybody else,
the people who work for them!
I’ve seen a lot of lousy managers over my career who offend,
unfairly criticize, or alienate their subordinates. Yet, it never ceases
to amaze how when even someone like this makes a decision—
whether the decision is a good one, a marginal one, or a deter-
mination of even terrible impact—the respect level for that same
manager often goes way up. For merely possessing the attribute
and ability to make a decision, the esteem of that leader rises in
the eyes of those around them, despite their other baggage.
20 MANAGING BY ACCOUNTABILITY

It’s what we do that counts. Not what we don’t do. Taking

action and making decisions are an open window into what we
are about as people and as leaders. Making decisions defines our
value and benchmarks our credibility. Claiming the mantra of
accountability means the responsibility to act. And act well. Failing
to do so makes the leader a paper tiger and a hypocrite. The kind
of leader people snicker at under their breath during a meeting
and laugh about after it’s over.
In order to be an effective, results-oriented leader, accountabil-
ity and responsibility must be viewed like the wings of an airplane.
One without the other is worthless. When working together, great
things can happen. Bottom-line business improvements for the
organization like higher growth, increased efficiencies, and im-
proved strategic alliance relationships all become possible. These
all require action.
However, there are common mistakes that many right-thinking
managers make when they claim “It happened on my watch.” If
not avoided, these mistakes can damage, often seriously, the ability
of a leader to be successful. The next chapter will lay those out.
 Chapter 3

The Great Accountability

Mistakes

Somebody does somethin’ stupid, that’s human. They don’t stop when
they see it’s wrong, that’s a fool.
Elvis Presley

ACCOUNTABILITY MEANS that someone in charge is taking

responsibility for a particular outcome or result. “It happened on
my watch.” It forces action.
The responsibility component takes over when a person claim-
ing accountability takes viable, coherent steps to fix whatever
caused the problem in the first place.
If little or no tangible action is taken, then there is no real
accountability and the blame game will usually take over.
If action is commenced, then it needs to be done in the right
way. Managing by accountability demands it. Doing so allows
those who lead to maintain and build their credibility in the
eyes of their subordinates and superiors while increasing their
achievement as managers.
22 MANAGING BY ACCOUNTABILITY

Right vs. Wrong Action

It may be disheartening to say, but merely trying to do some-
thing for the right reasons or to demonstrate leadership is still not
enough to successfully manage by accountability. The actions that
are executed as part of the responsibility component must be the
right ones. A bad plan, regardless how well-intentioned, is still
a bad plan and will inevitably render bad results. Conversely, a
solid, well-thought-out plan based on sound principles will go a
long way to achieving beneficial results.
For those of you old enough to remember, the aftermath of
the 1979 Three Mile Island crisis provides an example of lousy
planning and even worse execution in a situation where manage-
ment by accountability was sorely lacking. Before the incident at
the Pennsylvania nuclear power plant on the Susquehanna River,
most people had never heard of the place. When the initial infor-
mation from the accident in the Unit 2 reactor at the plant began
to leak out, it was sketchy and contradictory.
The utility company that ran the plant said the situation was
manageable. But officials from the mayor’s office to the Oval Office
worried about possible complications that would shower radioac-
tivity on the small communities around Three Mile Island—or
perhaps even farther. Government engineers feared that the re-
actor’s nuclear fuel would melt out of its thick steel and cement
encasement, or that a hydrogen gas bubble in the core would
explode.
In Harrisburg, less than ten miles away, the state’s new governor
struggled with conflicting advice on whether to begin an evacua-
tion that might affect more than 600,000 people. In Washington,
100 miles south, federal regulators anxiously sought reliable in-
formation to guide local authorities and the president, former
nuclear engineer Jimmy Carter. Sounds a lot like the response to
Hurricane Katrina, no?
 The Great Accountability Mistakes 23

Revelations during the decade-long cleanup of the crippled

reactor showed that its core was more seriously damaged than
originally suspected. But scientists still disagree on whether the
radiation vented during the event was enough to affect the health
of those who lived near the plant.
Although the crisis was the result of equipment and operator
failure, reluctance by officials to treat the situation seriously from
the onset and from an accountability point of view exacerbated
the emergency. The little information released was sketchy and
inaccurate. People were angry and frightened. The media had a
field day.
Another example of lack of a solid accountability-based plan
occurred when Perrier Group of America, Inc. announced a highly
embarrassing product recall on February 9, 1990. The recall came
in response to a report released by North Carolina regulators that
stated Perrier’s high-priced bottled water was contaminated with
benzene, a poisonous liquid shown to cause cancer in laboratory
animals. Even though the U.S. Food and Drug Administration
said that the benzene levels did not pose “a significant short-
term health risk,” Perrier’s management requested the removal
of the product from supermarkets and restaurants in the United
States and Canada. A good first step on the road to managing by
accountability.
However, a Perrier official stated at the time that the com-
pany believed the contamination could be traced to an employee’s
mistaken use of a fluid containing benzene to clean the machin-
ery on the bottling line that fills bottles for the North American
market. Initially, the recall affected only the United States and
Canada—an inventory of some seventy million bottles. Soon it
was made worldwide when Dutch and Danish officials also found
benzene in some Perrier bottles.
The incident turned into a disaster for the company, in large
part because the company’s leaders were ducking accountability.
24 MANAGING BY ACCOUNTABILITY

After traces of benzene were found in bottles in other parts of

the world, company officials altered their original explanation.
Benzene, they now said, is naturally present in carbon dioxide
(the gas that makes Perrier bubbly) and is normally filtered out
before the water is bottled.
For unknown reasons workers had inexplicably failed to change
the filters. Meanwhile, Perrier still insisted that its famous
spring in Vergeze, France, was unpolluted. These inconsistent
statements and lack of accountability further raised consumers’
suspicions.
The big question was what long-term effects the contamination
incident would have on Perrier, which had positioned itself as a
naturally pure bottled water brand. The strong underpinning for
the success of bottled waters was their perceived safety compared
to ordinary tap water.
In 1989 Perrier was the leading imported water, holding about
6 percent of the U.S. bottled water segment. But the success
brought intense competition from other bottled water brands
in the 1990s. While the total category was growing at about
10 percent annually, Perrier’s growth slowed to about 5 percent
per year.
In an effort to regain market share lost during the months-
long recall, Perrier spent $25 million in a U.S. advertising cam-
paign. The message was, “Perrier: Worth Waiting For.” However,
it seemed that consumers began to believe that any bottled water
would do. Exacerbating the problem was the FDA’s decision to
make Perrier drop the words “Naturally Sparkling” from its la-
bel since its investigators had discovered that Perrier artificially
carbonates its water after taking it out of the ground. Again,
company officials were concerned about what beliefs consumers
were forming about the brand.
By 1995, Perrier sales had fallen to one-half their 1989
peak. The company had to mount a comeback strategy. While
 The Great Accountability Mistakes 25

attempting to regain share for the Perrier brand through new

distribution channels, the company began to invest in other brands
that did not have the Perrier name attached to them. Despite the
company’s efforts to regain sales, the brand is still not among the
best-selling bottled waters in the United States. The question re-
mains up till today: For how long will the memory of the benzene
incident and the lack of accountability forever tarnish the Perrier
brand name?

Figuring It Out
In 1982, Johnson & Johnson’s Tylenol medication commanded
35 percent of the U.S. over-the-counter analgesic market—
representing something like 15 percent of the company’s profits.
Unfortunately, at that point one individual succeeded in lac-
ing the drug with cyanide. Seven people died as a result, and a
widespread panic ensued about how widespread the contamina-
tion might be. By the end of the episode, everyone knew that
Tylenol was associated with the scare. Johnson & Johnson man-
agement did very little to alleviate the concerns of the public and
paid for it. Accountability was nowhere to be seen. The company’s
market value fell by $1 billion as a result.
Those in charge at Johnson & Johnson got a second chance
to set things right when the same situation happened in 1986.
The company demonstrated that it had learned its lessons well. It
acted quickly—ordering that Tylenol should be recalled from ev-
ery outlet—not just those in the state where it had been tampered
with. Not only that, but the company decided the product would
not be reestablished on the shelves until something had been done
to provide better product protection.
As a result, Johnson & Johnson developed the tamperproof
packaging that would make it much more difficult for a similar
incident to occur in future. The cost was a high one. In addition
26 MANAGING BY ACCOUNTABILITY

to the impact on the company’s share price when the crisis first
hit, the lost production and destroyed goods as a result of the
recall were considerable.
However, the company won praise for its quick and appropriate
action and accountability-based approach. Having sidestepped the
position others have found themselves in—of having been slow
to act as accountable in the face of consumer concern—they
achieved the status of consumer champion through managing by
accountability.
Within five months of the disaster, the company had recovered
70 percent of its market share for the drug—and the fact this
went on to improve over time showed that the company had
succeeded in preserving the long-term value of the brand. In fact,
there is some evidence that it was rewarded by consumers who
were so reassured by the steps taken that they switched from other
painkillers to Tylenol.
They acted quickly, with complete openness about what had
happened, and immediately sought to remove any source of danger
based on the worst-case scenario—not waiting for evidence to see
whether the contamination might be more widespread.
Having acted quickly, they then sought to ensure that measures
were taken which would prevent as far as possible a recurrence of
the problem. They showed themselves to be prepared to bear the
short-term cost in the name of consumer safety—and account-
ability. That more than anything else established a basis for the
trust with their customers, which lasts until today.

The Great Accountability Mistakes

Clearly, people in positions of responsibility should be held to
account for what they do. But in many cases, the accountability
that is delivered is far short of what is truly needed—for whatever
reason. This can be at least partially be attributed to what I label
as The Great Accountability Mistakes.
 The Great Accountability Mistakes 27

We Set Our Personal Expectations Way Too Low

Accountability is a relationship based on the obligation to

demonstrate and take responsibility for performance in light of
agreed expectations. It starts not from without but from within.
Fundamental to this is the setting of high personal expectations.
Many managers expect themselves to perform at the level they
think their boss or subordinates want from them. It is very dan-
gerous stuff to assume that their interest and expectations are best
for you. They may be. But they also may not.

We Fail to Live the Integrity Imperative

How many business leaders believe they have learnt the lessons
taught by Enron? What if I told you that the U.S. Securities
and Exchange Commission (SEC) currently receives some 40,000
whistle-blowing reports every month—compared to 6,400 per
month the year Enron imploded? Would it make you wonder
whether business leaders should take a second look at account-
ability and the integrity it demands?
We have been misguided into believing that mandated account-
ability somehow, someway equates to ethics, and that if you have
solid corporate governance policies, the ability of the organization
and, by association, the people who work in it can be labeled as
accountable and sound. Managing successfully by accountability
is rooted in a high level of personal integrity, and nothing can
replace it.

We Treat Accountability as a Noun, Rather a Verb

If somebody screws up, they will often wrap themselves in the
coat of accountability, say something like “Trust me, everything
will be fine,” and then disappear. This is not managing by ac-
countability.
28 MANAGING BY ACCOUNTABILITY

To avoid the horrors of the blame game, it is incumbent for

those who manage by accountability to ensure that term is treated
as a verb, not a noun. Action must follow. But in a lot of cases the
only output is rhetoric, obfuscation, and little else. . . .

We Fail to See How Change and Conflict Are Directly

Tied to Accountability
In today’s touchy/feely world, conflict is often held as the worst
possible outcome of any situation. In many organizations, if some-
one simply raises their voice in a meeting—regardless what is
said and regardless what spurned it—word about the “incident”
spreads like wildfire:

“Did you hear that Dave got loud at the Tuesday morning
meeting?”
“Yea, can you believe it?”
“I’ll make sure to stay away from him so he doesn’t yell at
me either.”

Change, like leadership, is not always full of glory and pats on

the back. It can be ugly, painful, and fraught with conflict. How-
ever, if we are to manage by accountability, we need to embrace
the short-term sacrifice that change and conflict will inevitably
bring—rather than run away from it.

We Don’t Help Others Around Us to Develop

Personal Accountability

In the world of teams, no manager can be an island. To view

ourselves as a singular entity in a universe of strategic alliances,
collaborations, and partnerships is short-sighted and detrimental.
 The Great Accountability Mistakes 29

We have to work with others. To enhance the effectiveness of our

ability to lead, that means helping out others when it comes to
their ability to manage by accountability.
Each of these mistakes can torpedo the correct-thinking man-
ager who has chosen accountability as their path. The next chap-
ters will glare through the looking glass on each of these mistakes
and turn them on their heads to see clearly the benefits of doing
things the right ways. At the end, results, integrity, and effective-
ness will become possible for managers as they seek to lead via
accountability.
 Chapter 4

Set Your Personal

Expectations Higher Than
Those Around You

It is easy to fool yourself. It is possible to fool the people you work for. It is
more difficult to fool the people you work with. But it is almost
impossible to fool the people who work under you.
Harry B. Thayer

SAM WALTON ONCE OBSERVED that “high expectations are

the key to everything.” To be effective as a manager who adheres
to high standards of personal accountability, it is imperative that
you set your personal expectations higher than those around you
do. In other words, you should expect more from yourself than
your boss or colleagues or subordinates do.
I work in a business that runs 24 × 7. We have the luxury of
evaluating ourselves every morning. We always tend to focus on
the areas of opportunity, otherwise known as mistakes or miscues.
It is very easy in any position of leadership to fall into the trap of
worrying more about what others think about our performance
than how we measure up to our own standards of performance.
When you wake up every morning in the “how am I going to
explain this to my boss or my subordinates” syndrome, life is not
32 MANAGING BY ACCOUNTABILITY

pleasant. The worst part is, your people see right through this.
Instead of a leader, you are a mouthpiece or a puppet or the paper
tiger we talked about earlier.
I am convinced that this is one of the major drivers in credi-
bility. People want to have a leader who is confident. One cannot
exude confidence if he or she is worried about someone else’s ex-
pectations. Nor can one truly hold oneself to a high standard of
accountability.
There have been so many times that I have heard people say,
“Don’t do that again because I’ll catch hell from my boss!” The
best managers are those who led and managed in such a manner
that you never saw any evidence that they even had a boss. They
were their own boss. They worried about their own high exacting
standards and expectations. Standards and expectations that were
higher than anyone else’s.
They were concerned and even upset if the results were not
acceptable, not because of what others would think, but because
of what they felt and thought about it. Those leaders gained the
respect of their employees. The ones who wore somebody else’s
expectations on their sleeve did not.
Managers who do not have high expectations and bounce back
and forth based on other’s reaction are unpredictable. This makes
them very difficult to work for. They have great difficulty in
making decisions. All of us have, either at one time or another,
known someone like this. Seeing these kinds of people in action
makes us feel sorry for them. Sympathy does not, however, create
respect and credibility.
Probably most of us have had a boss at one time or another who
had to pass bad news by blaming on the “higher-ups.” “I didn’t
want to make these cuts but headquarters made me.” “I wanted
to give you a higher annual performance evaluation, but my boss
made me lower it.” “I know that no one wants to work forced
overtime, but you know what corporate would say if we didn’t get
this shipment out.” All the blame game!
 Set Your Personal Expectations Higher Than Those Around You 33

Those who manage by accountability must have high standards

and expectations. They have to be able to tell the truth, most
important, when the truth may be bad news.
In our company, our field General Managers pride themselves
in saying to their people, “Don’t look any further up the lad-
der than me. I am headquarters as far as you are concerned. I
have ownership in the decision-making process and I hold myself
accountable for the outcomes. I am headquarters.”
Water-cooler talk like “I heard his boss made him do it” is not a
complement to someone in charge. With someone who manages
by accountability, you never know what their superior said. You
don’t even care. Managers who set high expectations are known
to their people as “take charge” leaders. They breed integrity and
credibility. And they are great. As Wayne Gretzky used to say, “I
skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it is.”

What Are Expectations?

Among the most powerful forces we experience in life are ex-
pectations. Some expectations come from other people. Parents,
spouses, peers, superiors, subordinates, friends, children, neigh-
bors, customers, and plenty of others all have their expectations of
us. They expect certain things regarding our speech, our behavior,
and our character. Often, the most influential expectations are
the ones that go unstated. And the source of some expectations
may be hard to define. We allow our lives to be determined by a
powerful yet indefinite group we call “they.” “They” expect this
or that of me, and I feel compelled to satisfy them.
Other expectations come more clearly from within us. We ac-
cept certain norms, and expect to follow them. We prize certain
goals, and expect to realize them. These internal expectations
make their presence known. When they conflict with each other,
then we feel the pain of division and confusion until we choose
between them.
34 MANAGING BY ACCOUNTABILITY

Some expectations are unjust, whether they come from inside

or outside. They demand that we do what we cannot or should
not do. What they ask exceeds our ability or does violence to our
identity. There are other expectations that are just. They call on
us to do what we can or what we need to do. They show us our
responsibility to others. They contribute to the establishment of
our true identity.
Expectations seem intricately tied to what philosophers have
called “virtue.” One general and traditional definition of “virtue”
is a habit that enables one to do something good easily. This very
general definition is encapsulated in the old saying “practice makes
perfect.” Practice over time creates a habit, an abiding ability, and
a skill that enables us to do something with ease. If I pick up a
knife and a piece of wood and try to carve something, or even just
try to whittle the wood, I will gouge it and ruin it quickly, because
I have no practice in carving wood. I have not practiced whittling
or carving and I have no ability or skill.
If, however, I spent hours a day learning to whittle or carve, I
might well become skilled. I would have acquired the “virtue” of
a carver. So too with piano playing or speaking French or dealing
with customer service. Of course some people seem to have a
natural ability or inclination toward various activities of soul,
mind, or body: there are natural athletes, people with seemingly
innate musicality or intellectual genius or a gift for languages.
But without denying innate dispositions, most activities can be
cultivated by practice and habit so that we can acquire the virtue
to perform them more easily than we would if we did not practice.
Usually, however, we use the word virtue in everyday speech in
a different sense. Virtue usually implies a moral quality. We may
begin with our general definition of virtue (a habit that enables
one to do something well with ease), and then apply it to moral
matters in recognition of this everyday sense of the word. A moral
virtue is a habit of soul that enables one to do moral good and
 Set Your Personal Expectations Higher Than Those Around You 35

to avoid wrong easily in some respect. For instance, the virtue of

honesty in money matters means a habit of respecting the property
of others which makes it easy for me to return money belonging
to someone else that I have found or easy for me not to surrender
to a temptation to steal. In this case we have taken the general idea
of a virtue and applied it specifically to a moral matter, to doing
moral good and avoiding evil.
The matter of habit, of acquiring a skill or ability or tendency
through repetition or custom or gradual development or practice,
remains. Virtue at its core is true understanding of one’s own
abilities when setting expectations. It’s a funny thing about life; if
you refuse to accept anything but the best, you very often get it.
The world is full of abundance and opportunity, but far too many
people come to the fountain of life with a sieve instead of a tank
car . . . a teaspoon instead of a steam shovel. They expect little and
as a result they get little.

Seeing the Expectations Before They Materialize

To be someone who manages by accountability, the future be-

longs to those who see possibilities before they become obvious.
There are risks and costs to a program of action and setting your
expectations higher than those of the individuals around you. But
they are far less than the long-range risks and costs of comfortable
inactions. Great leaders are those who get up and look for circum-
stances they want, and if they can’t find them, they make them.
This is done through the development of habits.
Since the time of Aristotle at least, writers interested in moral
matters have noted the importance of habit in developing char-
acter and setting one’s expectations That is, they note the impor-
tance of developing habits that dispose children, and then adults,
to expect to do the right thing. Custom becomes second nature.
Habits incline us one way or the other. These habitual inclinations,
36 MANAGING BY ACCOUNTABILITY

if they dispose us toward doing good, are virtues. If they dispose

us toward doing evil, they are vices.
A virtue doesn’t destroy free will. A truthful person, for instance,
is someone who is accustomed to telling the truth, even when
doing so is embarrassing or personally costly. This benchmarks
their expectation of themselves when it comes to truthfulness.
Such a person, however, may be tempted to lie and may actually
do so. The virtue of truthfulness makes it easier for the person to
resist the temptation; at least if he tells a lie it will be against his
inclination and will probably prick his conscience. Virtues and
vices are habits and dispositions, which make something easier
or harder, but not inevitable. The sum of our habits of soul, our
virtues and vices, is our character. The idea that character and
virtue, which determine our expectations, are essentially private
and not of concern in a setting like business is short-sighted
and dangerous in the extreme. Tyco, Enron, Adelphia, Global
Crossing, et al. show us what omitting character and virtue and
having no valid expectations except greed can do.

Getting What You Expect

You often get what you expect. As a manager, this is a very

powerful reality, which you can harness to work for you, or you
can let it control performance in a negative way. It is your job to
set and use expectations in a manner that supports and enhances
performance. The theory that expectations affect performance is
known as the Pygmalion Principle. Its name is derived from a
Greek myth in which a sculptor named Pygmalion sculpted a
statue of a woman, and fell in love with it.
His love was so strong that it transformed the statue into a
real woman. It is this transformative effect resulting from expec-
tations which is the basis of the Pygmalion Principle. Research in
the field of education has supported the theory by demonstrating
 Set Your Personal Expectations Higher Than Those Around You 37

that students who the teacher believed were smarter than the rest
of the group (when they were actually randomly chosen) per-
formed substantially better than those believed to be “average.” In
these experiments, the only difference between the students who
performed best and the rest of the group was the teacher’s expec-
tations. As a manager, you also have the power to influence em-
ployee’s performance through the expectations you set on yourself.

Setting Your Expectations

Here are seven keys that will help you set the kinds of expecta-
tions that will enable you to effectively manage by accountability.

Have Clear Expectations

Effective managers are not vague about the things that they want
to do. They are definite about their aims and responsibilities. Be
as specific as possible when setting goals.

Commit Wholeheartedly to Fulfilling

Your Expectations
Managing by accountability implies being prepared to do what
it takes to get the job done. This means that they must press on
through discouragement, stand firm in trials, and learn how to
handle disappointment and stay faithful when tempted to drift or
stray.

Ensure That the Expectation Is Realistic for You

Can you see yourself achieving it? Expectations must be realistic

and down-to-earth too. I know that faith can move mountains
and all things are possible for those who believe. But I could
38 MANAGING BY ACCOUNTABILITY

never see myself beating Tiger Woods at this year’s U.S. Open.
No matter how much faith I have, the expectation is not viable.
Occasionally, we are all prone to set impractical expectations.
We must be practical and see ourselves achieving the goals that
we set.

Write Down Your Expectations

Those which are written down are over twenty times more likely
to be achieved than goals not made explicit. Write down the things
that will prevent you from achieving your expectations also. This
keeps us vigilant and prompts us to take evasive action when our
expectations are threatened. Fear, doubt, and uncertainty are just
some examples of what might stop leaders from achieving their
goals. But if we remind ourselves of these pitfalls, we will more
than likely take steps to steer clear of them or deal firmly with
them when they arise. Is there anything in your life that could stop
you achieving the things that you have set out to do? If so deal
with the foes now. Ask yourself “What effect will achieving this
expectation have on me?” If you were to reach a goal of getting a
new job promotion or starting up a relationship, what effect is it
going to have on you?

Determine How You Will Know When You’ve

Achieved Your Expectations

Do you know when your goals have been reached? They are
not endless projects and responsibilities. We have to identify what
success looks like. We have to acknowledge when our job’s done
and realize when our tasks are completed. We must know when
our dreams come true and see when our vision is fulfilled.
When setting their expectations, those who manage by account-
ability should always ask, “Is this thing right for me? Is the timing
 Set Your Personal Expectations Higher Than Those Around You 39

right for doing this project?” Remember too that different goals
have different gestation periods. A chicken egg takes twenty-one
days to break into life, a human embryo takes nine months, and
an elephant takes two years. Expectations are like that. Some are
accomplished quickly, some take many years.
 Chapter 5

Live the Integrity Imperative

The question for each man to settle is not what he would do if he had
the means, time, influence and educational advantages, but what he
will do with the things he has.
Hamilton Wright Mabee

RIGHT AFTER TAKING the helm of our company, Matt Rose,

our current CEO, inherited a crisis that threatened to tear apart
the very fabric of the organization. It involved charges of ge-
netic manipulation, threats of massive lawsuits, and a visit by
60 Minutes. Not a good combination, to say the least.
Senior management had learned that some frontline workers
in Nebraska were in the process of initiating lawsuits against the
company because they claimed the railroad had been doing some
genetic testing on them without their knowledge. The first incli-
nation was to deny the charges and say they were not a possibility.
Matt, however, decided to fully explore the situation before the
company made any further comments or took action.
While, under Matt’s direction, we were trying to get to the
bottom of what had actually happened, 60 Minutes got fired up
42 MANAGING BY ACCOUNTABILITY

about the possibility of a big, bad corporate giant taking advantage

of its workers. And the ball started rolling. . . .
A typical 60 Minutes story can take upwards of six months from
the time production starts until it is aired. This case was no excep-
tion. At the outset, we were originally contacted by their producers
and we told them we had no comment until a determination could
be made as to what took place. Undaunted, 60 Minutes moved
forward and interviewed all of the employees, their lawyers, and
seemingly anyone else who had it in for the company.
As time wore on, it was discovered that in fact some genetic
testing had taken place by some managers who were hoping to
reduce back injuries in our employees—a common problem many
of our folks experience due to the rigors of their jobs. They were
trying to do the right thing, but were going about it in the wrong
way.
When Matt learned of this, he immediately put an action plan
in place that dealt with the errant managers and made restitution
with the wronged workers. He also wrote a letter to 60 Minutes
saying the company and, specifically himself, were accountable for
what had happened and detailed the responsible action that had
been taken to solve the problem once and for all.
There was no cover-up. There was nothing done to cause further
damage to the workers who made the charges. There was no blame
game. In short, it wasn’t news. Nevertheless, 60 Minutes ran the
story. Conversely, in the Enron, Tyco, and WorldCom cases, which
were unfolding around the same time, no one at the highest levels
of those companies ever admitted anything wrong was ever done.
Warren Buffett said it correctly when he observed that to be
folks who manage by accountability, managers don’t need inde-
pendent directors, oversight committees, or auditors absolutely
free of conflicts of interest to keep an eye on them. They need to
quit talking about the bad apples and reflect instead on their own
behavior. They simply need to do what’s right.1
 Live the Integrity Imperative 43

After I observed Matt’s behavior in this difficult time as a new

CEO, and saw that he managed by accountability, I was certain
that he was someone I could work for.

Integrity Means Action

It’s what we do that counts. Not what we don’t do. Or what we
intend to do. Taking action and making decisions is an open win-
dow into what we are about both as people and as leaders. Making
decisions defines our value and benchmarks our credibility.

“Pleasers” and “Yes Men”

Throughout my career, I have made every effort never to be
a pleaser or a “yes man.” These are kinds of managers that can
destroy an organization. How many times do managers try to read
the tea leaves and guess where the popular opinions are. Often
these leaders simply don’t know any better: they don’t know how
to determine the right course for themselves, so they take polls
to see whether the winds of popular opinion are blowing on a
particular day and simply give the people what they want. The
problem is that predicting the direction of the majority is just as
difficult as predicting the winds of weather. And, it has no basis
in accountable behavior.
There is always a strong temptation for leaders to please
people. . . . Why? To be popular, to not make enemies, to not
seem hateful and unloving, so people won’t get mad at them, to
keep the peace and to keep their job. . . . And when we run around
trying to please people, we become like the guy spinning plates at
the circus.
When I was brand new at my current company, I had an
initial meeting with a boss a few levels above me: an unflappable,
grandfatherly gentleman who was known throughout the industry
44 MANAGING BY ACCOUNTABILITY

as a leader of integrity and action. During our conversation, I made

a flippant comment, something like “I just want to please you.”
He immediately turned beet red. He darted back, “If you think
your role here is to please me, you couldn’t be farther from the
truth. You are here to do your job!”
Although “Yes men” are common everywhere and can hurt
things by agreeing with everything you say, pleasers are the worst.
Pleasers are the enemy. They go out of their way to hide problems
and obfuscate the truth. And, by not disclosing the truth, they
can ruin the whole year or your career.
Living the integrity imperative means being able to deliver the
bad news. Whether your boss or your subordinates, if they have
to hear bad news from someone else, your credibility as a manager
is shot. Managing by accountability means the ability to deliver
the bad news on time and without candy coating. This will raise
the respect level for you from both your boss and subordinates.
Moreover, many times, those above and below you in the or-
ganizational structure will already know the bad news before you
do. Trying to hide or bury or parse out the truth can make you
look foolish and weak.
An ancient Persian proverb offers the following excellent advice
on leaders who manage by accountability and action.

He who knows not, and knows not that he knows not is a fool—
shun him.
He who knows not, and knows that he knows not is a child—teach
him.
He who knows, and knows not that he knows is asleep—wake
him.
He who knows, and knows that he knows is wise—follow him.

An influential person will choose accountability. To be respon-

sible to others and themselves; to allow others to call themselves
to account. An unaccountable person, on the other hand, will
 Live the Integrity Imperative 45

answer to no one except the popular whims of the moment. At its

core, personal accountability is about character. It welcomes the
integrity imperative and embraces it. It is the direct opposite of
management by public opinion poll or by “yes men” and pleasers.
Harry Truman hit it square on the head when he observed, “I
wonder how far Moses would have gone if he had taken a poll in
the Egyptian desert? How far would the Reformation have gone
if Martin Luther had taken a poll? It isn’t the popular opinion of
the moment that counts. It is right and wrong and leadership—
men with fortitude, honesty, and a belief in the right—that makes
epochs in the history of the world.”

Integrity Is More Than the Public View

To make the point that integrity is more than what we do in
public, a friend of mine takes out a $20 bill and asks his employees,
“Who would like this $20 bill?” Then he crumples it up, steps on
it, rolls it around, and then holds it up again and asks, “Who still
wants this $20 bill?”
The value remains no matter what the item looks like on the
outside—no matter how scarred, bruised, or beaten, the value is
still the same. That is integrity.
So fearful were the ancient Chinese of their enemies on the
north that they built the Great Wall, one of the Seven Wonders of
the Ancient World. It was so high they knew no one could climb
over it, and so thick that nothing could break it down. Then they
settled back to enjoy their security.
But during the first one hundred years of the wall’s existence,
China was invaded three times—from the north! Not once did
the enemy break down the wall or climb over its top. Each time
they bribed a gatekeeper and marched right through the gates.
The Chinese were so busy relying on the walls of stone that they
forgot to teach integrity to their children. To lead effectively, the
inside needs to match up with the outside persona.
46 MANAGING BY ACCOUNTABILITY

Some time ago, I heard about a fellow in Cleveland who went

into a fried-chicken franchise to get some chicken for himself and
the young lady with him. She waited in the car while he went in
to pick up the chicken. Inadvertently, the manager of the store
handed the guy the box in which he had placed the financial
proceeds of the day instead of the box of chicken. You see, he was
going to make a deposit and had camouflaged it by putting the
money in a fried-chicken box. The fellow took his box, went back
to the car, and the two of them drove away.
When they got to the park for their picnic and opened the box,
they discovered they had a box full of money. The guy realized
there must have been a mistake, so he got back in his car and
returned to the place and gave the money back to the manager.
Well, the manager was elated!
He was so pleased that he told the young man, “Stick around,
I want to call the newspaper and have them take your picture.
You’re the honest guy in town.”
“Oh, no, don’t do that!” said the fellow. “Why not?” asked the
manager. “Well,” he said, “You see, I’m married, and the woman
I’m with right now is not my wife.”
On the surface of life, it is a lot easier to demonstrate integrity.
We return money that’s not ours. We pay our bills on time. We
work hard at our jobs. We volunteer at church. But if someone
were to write a story about your life, about the things nobody else
knows, would we really want him or her to write everything?

Integrity—Inside and Out—in Action

Day after day, Goliath paraded along the slopes of the Valley of
Elah threatening and blaspheming the armies of Israel. And they
were all afraid of him. Goliath had a basic strategy. INTIMIDA-
TION! And it worked! No one would fight him. Every morning
and every evening for 40 days Goliath came out to taunt his
enemies.
 Live the Integrity Imperative 47

On the other side, Saul and the men of Israel were gathered
and camped in the valley of Elah, and drew up in battle array to
encounter the Philistines. The Philistines stood on the mountain
on one side, while Israel stood on the mountain on the other side,
with the valley between them.
Goliath was six cubits in height (9 feet 9 inches tall). He had a
bronze helmet on his head, and he was clothed with scale-armor
that weighed five thousand shekels of bronze. The weight of five
thousand shekels weight equals 125 pounds!
He also had bronze greaves on his legs and a bronze javelin slung
between his shoulders. The shaft of his spear was like a weaver’s
beam, and the head of his spear weighed six hundred shekels of
iron (15 pounds); his shield-carrier also walked before him.
He stood and shouted to the ranks of Israel and said to them,
“Why do you come out to draw up in battle array? Am I not the
Philistine and you servants of Saul? Choose a man for yourselves
and let him come down to me.”
“If he is able to fight with me and kill me, then we will become
your servants; but if I prevail against him and kill him, then you
shall become our servants and serve us.”
Again the Philistine said, “I defy the ranks of Israel this day;
give me a man that we may fight together.”
The Philistines proposed a battle in which two representative
champions from Israel and Philistia would duel it out, a not
uncommon method of limiting war in the ancient world. It min-
imized bloodshed and made life a whole lot easier for everybody,
that is, if your champion won.
However, the Israelites had no one who could compete with
Goliath. When Saul and all Israel heard these words of the Philis-
tine, they were dismayed and greatly afraid. And it went on and
on and on for 40 days. . . .
The dawn of the 41st day though was the beginning of the end
for Goliath. There was a young shepherd boy sent on an errand
by his father that took him into the vicinity where this insulting
48 MANAGING BY ACCOUNTABILITY

Goliath was parading his strength. David stopped and stared in

disbelief when Goliath pulled this shenanigan that day.
Something happened within David at that moment. “No giant
should ever be able to intimidate anyone this way. He’s going
down.”
Then Saul clothed David with his garments and put a bronze
helmet on his head, and he clothed him with armor. David girded
his sword over his armor and tried to walk, for he had not tested
them. So David said to Saul, “I cannot go with these, for I have
not tested them.” And David took them off. He took his stick in
his hand and chose for himself five smooth stones from the brook,
and put them in the shepherd’s bag that he had, even in his pouch,
and his sling was in his hand.
Then the Philistine came on and approached David, with the
shield-bearer in front of him. When the Philistine looked and
saw David, he disdained him; for he was but a youth, and ruddy,
with a handsome appearance. Goliath has got to be thinking,
“They have sent me a red-headed pretty-boy. I’m insulted by
that.”
The Philistine said to David, “Am I a dog, that you come to
me with sticks?” And added, “Come to me, and I will give your
flesh to the birds of the sky and the beasts of the field.”
Then it happened when the Philistine rose and came and drew
near to meet David that David ran quickly toward the battle line
to meet the Philistine.
You know the outcome. “Thus David prevailed over the Philis-
tine with a sling and a stone, and he struck the Philistine and
killed him; but there was no sword in David’s hand.”
Then David ran and stood over the Philistine and took his
sword and drew it out of its sheath and killed him, and cut off his
head with it. (If the stone merely knocked him out as some suggest,
then this would finish the job for sure.) When the Philistines saw
that their champion was dead, they fled.
 Live the Integrity Imperative 49

David was a man of integrity. When a person sees a great

injustice, a great need, and a great leadership vacuum, they rise
up and say, “Things must be different and I will be a difference-
maker.” David’s story teaches us that an inspired person of integrity
can beat a mighty military warrior with but the tools of a shepherd
and a heart of integrity.
 Chapter 6

Treat Accountability as a
Verb, Not a Noun

Courage is being scared to death—and saddling up anyway.

John Wayne

WHEN PEOPLE do hold themselves to account for what they

have done, it is often said like this at a press conference or in a
meeting room: “I take accountability for the mistakes that were
made.” Then, we wait. And we wait. And we wait some more for
the follow-up. And, it never happens.
Effective managers realize that treating accountability as a
noun—i.e. “I’m taking it”—is all well and good, but it is only
the first step. Action must be next. Words matter, yes. But the
problem must still be ultimately fixed or any talk of accountabil-
ity is just that, talk. “Words without actions are the assassins of
idealism,” once quipped Herbert Hoover.
For hundreds of years before Christopher Columbus was born,
the motto of Spain was ne plus ultra. This is Latin for “no more
beyond.” The Spaniards believed that they’d already discovered
everything worth discovering.
Of the many monuments to Columbus around the world, one
of the most beautiful is a statue in Spain of a huge lion with
52 MANAGING BY ACCOUNTABILITY

the words ne plus ultra underneath. However, the lion is eating

the first word ne. All that can be read is “more beyond.” This
was Columbus’s greatest legacy—he proved that there was more
beyond—because he acted.

Learning from Ants

Have you ever heard of a myrmecologist? No, it’s not a person
who studies “murmuring.” Myrmecology is the study of ants. I
don’t know about devoting one’s whole life to studying the little
things, but I do know that much of success as a manager has a lot
to do with the way ants operate.

It Is the Little Things That Matter

There are over 10,000 different species of ants. They are able
to lift twenty times their own body weight. This means that if I
had their strength I could lift approximately 4,000 lbs. Ants have
been found to build structures 500 times their own height. The
brain of one ant has 250,000 cells whereas the human brain has
10 billion cells
Ants also have two stomachs—one for storing up food to share
with others later, and one for itself. The life expectancy of an ant
is 45–60 days. Yet these tiny creatures accomplish much in a very
short life-span. And they can teach a whole lot about how to treat
accountability as a noun rather than a verb.
Some years ago a young man approached the foreman of a
logging crew and asked for a job. “That depends,” replied the
foreman. “Let’s see you fell this tree.” The young man stepped
forward and skillfully felled a great tree. Impressed, the foreman
exclaimed, “Great! You can start Monday!”
Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday rolled by, and Thurs-
day afternoon the foreman approached the young man and said,
“You can pick up your paycheck on the way out today.”
 Treat Accountability as a Verb, Not a Noun 53

Startled, he replied, “I thought you paid on Friday.” “Normally

we do,” answered the foreman, “but we’re letting you go today
because you’ve fallen behind. Our daily felling charts show that
you’ve dropped from first place on Monday to last on Wednesday.”
“But I’m a hard worker,” the young man objected. “I ar-
rive first, leave last, and even have worked through my coffee
breaks!”
The foreman, sensing the boy’s shock, thought for a minute
and then asked, “Have you been sharpening your ax?”
The young man replied, “I’ve been working too hard to take
the time.”

To Perform with a High Degree of Accountability,

There Must Be a Plan—but Don’t Plan Too Much!

At first glance at an anthill, you just see a lot of activity. Ants

running around everywhere—but they have a plan. I believe that
there are a lot of managers in companies who are active and whose
departments are filled with programs, committees, and red tape—
but they have no plan. They have no vision for the future. They
have little if any idea as to what their function is, and which way
they are going. Accountable managers must have a vision. They
must be as wise as ants. They must make all that they do count
for the betterment of the organization.
There is an amusing story from General Stonewall Jackson’s
famous valley campaign during the Civil War that illustrates this.
Jackson’s army found itself on one side of a river when it needed
to be on the other side. After telling his engineers to plan and
build a bridge so the army could cross, he called his wagon master
in to tell him that it was urgent the wagon train cross the river
as soon as possible. The wagon master started gathering all the
logs, rocks, and fence rails he could find and built a bridge. Long
before daylight General Jackson was told by his wagon master
all the wagons and artillery had crossed the river. General Jackson
54 MANAGING BY ACCOUNTABILITY

asked where are the engineers and what are they doing? The wagon
master’s only reply was that they were in their tent drawing up
plans for a bridge.

To Perform with Efficiency There Must Be

Participation from Others

Take a look at an anthill and you don’t see ants just sitting
around or standing around doing nothing. Every one of those
ants has a job, and no one has to tell them what it is. And no one
has to push them to do it. Wouldn’t you like your office to work
like that?
Human beings seem to be the only creatures who do things
half-way; throw things together at the last moment; put little,
if any, time or planning into their efforts. We show up at the
last minute unprepared. If ants ran their hills like a lot of people
run their businesses, the species would be dead within a year. As
Abraham Lincoln observed, “You can’t escape the responsibility
of tomorrow by evading it today.”
Ants work together in harmony. You know how they’re able to
do it? Each ant is accountable to itself more than any other ant.
And they’re so busy doing what they’re supposed to do that they
don’t have time to fight among themselves!

Preparedness Is Vital

Ants don’t know the meaning of procrastination. They don’t

wait till the weather turns cold before they are preparing. They
gather food while it is still warm and take it into their colony.
Many of those who work hard all day will never eat of the food
they are preparing because they will die before cold weather.
But they want to make certain that their families are taken
care of.
 Treat Accountability as a Verb, Not a Noun 55

The Relationship of Confidence and Action

Confidence

If there is one quality we should have that’ll make us success-

ful in taking action, it is confidence. What are the benefits of
having confidence? The Gallup organization regularly takes na-
tional surveys to study the impact of self-esteem and confidence
on people. The results are always that people with a high level of
self-confidence are more successful, are more satisfied with their
lives, are more willing to help others in need, are physically health-
ier, hold themselves to higher moral and ethical standards, and are
more likely to assume leadership.
John Maxwell says that confidence stabilizes you and at the same
stretches you. Confidence gives you a foundation to build upon
and it frees you up to take risks. Insecure people seldom stretch
because they are not confident enough to live life on the edge.
Jim Loehr said, “With confidence, you can reach truly amazing
heights; without confidence, even the simplest accomplishments
are beyond your grasp.”

Confidence and Accountability in Action

Another benefit of having confidence in yourself and the actions
you take is that it brings comfort to others. Imagine having a
surgery. You’re nervous. Before the surgery, your doctor comes
into the room to meet you and talk to you. And he is sort of pale
and his hands are sweaty, and he’s shaking nervously and he says to
you, “I don’t know how this surgery’s going to go, but I’ll do my
best and feel around in there and see what I can find.” A doctor
needs to be confident so that his patients will be comfortable.
Can you imagine an airline pilot coming over the intercom with a
quiver in his voice saying, “I hope we’ll be able to land this baby in
56 MANAGING BY ACCOUNTABILITY

Dallas. Keep your fingers crossed.” A pilot needs to be confident

in his actions so that people on the plane feel confident.
If you’ve ever been to the Kennedy Space Center, you’ll probably
agree that one of the highlights of the spectacular tour is the
restored Saturn V rocket. Millions of people held their breath
while a single man stepped onto the moon’s surface. For those
who remember, the event remains in their minds just as those
footprints remain in the lunar soil. At Kennedy Space Center, in
a spacious facility featuring a massive, real Saturn V rocket, those
moments return spectacularly to life. The Apollo/Saturn V Center
is a tribute to the Apollo Astronauts and the machines that got
them there—and brought them safely home.
Saturn V was developed to carry the Apollo spacecraft into
lunar orbit. At 104 tons, the rocket payload was roughly four
times that of the Space Shuttle. In order to launch what at that
time would be the largest rocket ever and most complex machine
ever built, a special rocket assembly facility and No. 39 launch
complex was constructed at the Kennedy Space Center.
At liftoff, the entire launch vehicle (including spacecraft) was
363 ft high; it weighed 6.3 million pounds; and the five Saturn
first-stage engines generated 7.7 million pounds of thrust.
The first test launch of the Saturn V took place in November
1967. In December 1968, the third Saturn V to be launched
sent Apollo 8 around the Moon. The sixth Saturn V launched
on July 20, 1969, propelled Apollo 11 to the Moon for the first
successful manned landing on the lunar surface. The Saturn V
rocket was used for subsequent Apollo missions to the Moon.
With termination of the Apollo program after the Apollo 17
mission, however, three Saturn V rockets out of the total of fifteen
produced remained unused.
A good friend of my coauthor is a gentleman named Paul
Thomarios, who owns several businesses in the Akron, Ohio,
area, including painting, coating, and construction companies.
 Treat Accountability as a Verb, Not a Noun 57

Paul’s father, a Greek immigrant from Asia Minor who was in

Seattle when the Nazis conquered his country, moved to Akron
with his family following World War II after serving four years
with the U.S. Army. His Dad’s family painting business prospered
over the years and was taken over by Paul in the early 1970s.
In 1996, the Smithsonian Institute invited bids to restore one of
the remaining Saturn V rockets for eventual display at the Kennedy
Space Center. Paul’s company submitted a bid and waited. It was
widely known that some of the biggest government contractors
had put forward their proposals as well. As the pool of candidates
for the job was reduced, Paul’s company remained in the running.
Finally, “to his shock and delight,” Paul was informed that he was
one of the last two finalists for the job.
Paul was told that he and the other bidder were to each make
a presentation to a group of Smithsonian and NASA employees
as well as an undisclosed number of government consultants.
Paul traveled to Florida and learned upon his arrival that the
other bidder was the formidable Bechtel—a huge multinational
conglomerate that does billions of dollars of business a year with
the Federal Government.
The meeting was scheduled so that the team from Bechtel—
twelve or thirteen in total—would go first. Paul waited alone
outside in the lobby. When he was called, he was a bit taken back
by the forty-eight people gathered in the room. A soft-spoken man,
Paul began to speak about the family values of his company and
the abilities of his team. Then he said something that demonstrates
how confidence and action are so intertwined:
“If we get this business, I will move down here full-time, along
with several of my key employees, until the job is done. You will
have us twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week.”
The Director of the project thanked Paul and asked him to wait
outside in the lobby, along with the entourage from Bechtel. After
about fifteen minutes, the Director came out and graciously told
58 MANAGING BY ACCOUNTABILITY

the Bechtel guys they could leave. Then he told Paul that it was
decided he would get the bid.
The Director told him, “If I give the bid to Bechtel, I know I’ll
never see those guys again. By giving it to you, I know you will
personally be accountable and act accordingly.”
The $2.3 million project involved removal of hazardous coat-
ings and reconstruction of the rockets without interruption of
public tours or the Space Center’s operation, including monthly
space shuttle launches. It was completed under an accelerated
construction schedule, and with such a high degree of quality
that Paul’s company—Thomarios
R —received a “Best Contrac-
tor” award from the Smithsonian Institute.
 Chapter 7

Accept Inevitable Change

and Conflict and
Accountability’s Role

The greatest separator in our world is action. There are those that do
and those that don’t.
John Maxwell

WHO IS REALLY the consistent leader? The person who changes.

Since change is the natural law of our being, a leader cannot
be consistent if they are stuck in a rut. And how can things
really change if no one is ever held to account for their actions?
Accountability is fundamental to changing anything that is poorly
performing or not working at all. If people know they will be held
to account for that which they do, they are much more likely to
change.
Without some system of accountability, most people won’t
change. You (and they) can write plans all day long. But if someone
isn’t involved in holding you (or them) accountable, it probably
won’t happen. The old adage "It’s not what’s expected, but what’s
inspected, that gets done" still holds true.
So, how are you building accountability into your life? Your
organization’s? Your employee’s performance? Because if there is
60 MANAGING BY ACCOUNTABILITY

no accountability, there probably won’t be any change. There may

be effort, but there won’t be significant change.
But here’s the problem. Most people don’t like change in their
lives. One man once wryly observed that the only people who DO
like change are “wet babies ” . . . and even they aren’t too excited
about it.
Even the venerable Henry Ford had issues when it came to deal-
ing with the inevitability of change. Back in 1912, Ford Motor Co.
had a production manager named William Knudsen—considered
one of the best in his field. Knudsen became convinced that the
Model T (which had been in production for four years now) had
to be updated. But, the only problem was, Henry Ford loved his
creation so much it was well known that he opposed changing
anything about the car.
According to Robert Lacey, in his best-selling biography, Ford:
The Man and the Machine, Knudsen thought to convince Ford by
building an updated and impressive model to show what could be
done with a few changes in color and design.
Ford had just returned from a European vacation, and he went
to a Highland Park, Michigan, garage and saw the new design
created by Knudsen. On-the-scene mechanics later revealed how
Ford responded:
They say that the car was a four-door job, and the top was
down, painted gleaming red and built on a new, low slung version
of the Model T.
One eyewitness tells how “Ford had his hands in his pockets,
and he walked around that car 3 or 4 times. . . . Finally, he got to
the left hand side of the car, and he takes his hands out, gets hold
of the door, and bang! He ripped the door right off! . . . How the
man done it, I don’t know! He jumped in there, and bang goes
the other door. Bang goes the windshield. He jumps over the back
seat and starts pounding on the top. He rips the top with the heel
of his shoe. He wrecked the car as much as he could.”1
 Accept Inevitable Change and Conflict and Accountability’s Role 61

Knudsen left for General Motors. Henry Ford nursed along the
Model T, but design changes in competitors’ models made it more
old-fashioned than he would admit. Competitive necessity finally
backed him into making the Model A, but his heart was never
in it.
Henry Ford was one of the most creative men of his era. And
yet even Ford resisted the obvious need for inevitable change.

The Fear of Change and Conflict

Many well-intentioned managers I know who want to manage
by accountability live in constant fear that any substantive effort
to change and improve will cause tumult and damaging conflict.
They are right to be scared. If accountability means the respon-
sibility to act, then action undertaken will lead to some kind of
change. And change by its nature causes some degree of upheaval.
However, if we really want to manage by accountability, how
is it possible to avoid all that? We can’t. Just because something
is uncomfortable and causes pain should never serve as an excuse
for a leader who is compelled to act.
I realize this puts managers who want to do the right things in
a tough spot. They know managing by accountability mandates
that changes must be made in order to achieve progress. And
they also know it can be very painful and difficult. Conflict will
arise from people who perceive any effort to change as threats to
their well-being. In this and my other books, I never said being
an effective, results-oriented leader was easy and glamorous. It
is tough stuff. Not everybody is cut out for it. Overcoming the
natural fear of change and conflict is necessary to succeed as a
leader.
In my younger days as an upstart manager, I was out on an
inspection trip in a major Western city where we had two rail
facilities, one right downtown and another just on the edge of
62 MANAGING BY ACCOUNTABILITY

town. Our business was large enough only to keep both of the
facilities running at half-capacity. When a facility runs at half-
capacity, it becomes very difficult to gain a reasonable return on
the assets base.
I thought to myself, we should close the facility downtown and
move all of the operations to the other facility. This was doable; in
fact it would provide tremendous efficiencies for the operation and
improve customer service. The risk was that we would have little
margin for error. Moreover, I was pushing the existing managers
who were very comfortable with what they had. They did not
see the need to change. It was a smooth operation that was never
in trouble. The management was happy and the employees were
happy. Why should they change?
The property in the downtown facility was prime real estate. We
could not only make the operation more efficient, but could also
sell the valuable land under it for a small fortune. However, what
would happen if we closed the yard, consolidated the facilities,
sold the expensive land, and operations ultimately suffered? There
would be no back-up plan. It was all or nothing.
The only option was to manage the operation so that you did
not need a failsafe. The problem was that this group had never
done that before. It was like a high-wire act without a net. This
change would result in the need for fewer employees. They were
not going to like that one bit. There was no doubt that complaints
would arise. They would probably reach the general manager’s
office 500 miles away very quickly.
At the tip of the sword, was the terminal manager, twenty years
my senior. He was proud of his accomplishments. He planned to
stay right there on that job until he retired. He did not want to
do anything to jeopardize his plan. Life was good, he made his
numbers, and no one bothered him. Why take a risk?
I had never taken on such a challenge with so many obstacles,
barriers, and potential pitfalls. Yet, I could see very clearly the
 Accept Inevitable Change and Conflict and Accountability’s Role 63

opportunity before me. I knew that it could work. I had almost

everything figured right, except the terminal manager.
Not wanting to risk discussing the idea with him, I decided to
bring in a study group of time and motion experts to quantify
the work events at the facilities to demonstrate that the plan
would work. The second day that these clipboard-laden efficiency
eggheads showed up, the terminal manager called and asked me
to fly out and meet with him. So I did.
“Dave, just level with me, I know that you are trying to prove
something. Why don’t you just tell me what you are thinking
about,” he said.
I thought carefully about what I was going to say before I said it.
I then explained to him in very careful language what the experts
and others thought. Matter-of-factly, he stated, “That’s doable.”
It just about knocked me off my chair.
He added that they’d wanted to do this project for a long while,
but had never received backing from senior management to pull
it off.
Now they had the backing, and it was their idea, not mine. I
was not changing anything, they were. I did not make the change,
I facilitated it.
That was twenty years ago. We made the change. It worked. The
property we sold to the city is now a major league sports stadium.
We hit a home run and I learned a valuable lesson. While most
people don’t like change, they would rather be the changer than
the chang-ee. They like being the changer even more when they
have support.
It wasn’t until four years ago that I was able to sit in the
stadium, enjoy a baseball game with a beer and a hot dog, and
think about that whole sequence of events. I had a big smile on
my face as I raised my glass in the air in a celebratory toast to
everyone who had helped pull it off. What would have happened
had fear taken over and nothing had been done. I can’t say for
64 MANAGING BY ACCOUNTABILITY

sure, but the net result would certainly have been much less in the
long run.

To Effectively Lead You Have to Just Get Over It

In the movie Back to the Future, Marty McFly goes back in time
to the year 1955 to make sure that his mom falls in love with his
dad. There’s a scene where Marty tries to get his dad to ask her
out.
And the dad says, “You mean on a date?”
Marty says, “Yeah.”
The timid dad says, “Gee, I don’t know, Marty. I mean, what
if she says no? What if she laughs at me? I just don’t think I can
take that kind of a rejection. You know what I mean?”
Marty looks down and says, “Yes. Yes, I know what you mean.”
The truth is that we all know what he means. No one likes to be
rejected. It hurts. It makes you feel like you’re not good enough.
That everyone is better than you. That you’re a loser.
Some of us have experienced rejection up-close and personal.
Maybe you had a boyfriend or girlfriend who didn’t want to be
with you anymore. Or maybe there was a job that you lost. Or
maybe you had a boss who kept yelling, “You’ll never amount to
anything!”
Whatever it was, at some point in your life, you experienced a
painful rejection. And you decided then and there that you didn’t
want to be hurt like that ever again.
For some people, all that matters is popularity. “What will other
people think of me? What if I don’t do what he wants me to do?
What if he or she rejects me? What if I fail? What if things don’t
work out?”
The reason why many of us are crippled by a fear is because we
care more about what people think than about what is necessary
 Accept Inevitable Change and Conflict and Accountability’s Role 65

and right to get things done. To achieve great things as a manager,

you simply have to get over that. You have to roll up your sleeves
and say, “I don’t care what these people say about me anymore. The
only thing I’m concerned about is what is right for the organization
and my people.”

We Must Know Where We Are Going and What We

Are Going to Do!
This is where integrity really plays a major role in how we lead.
It gives us the compass when everything around us is dark and
foggy. It lets us know where we are headed.
When he was eighty-eight years old, the late Supreme Court
Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes was traveling on a train. The
conductor came by and asked for his ticket. Judge Holmes searched
his pockets and fumbled through his wallet without success.
The conductor was sympathetic: “Don’t worry, Mr. Holmes,
the Pennsylvania Railroad will be happy to trust you. When you
reach your destination, you will probably find the ticket and you
can mail it to us.”
The conductor’s kindness did not put Justice Holmes at ease.
Holmes said, “My dear man, my problem is not where is my
ticket? My problem is, I have forgotten where I am going.”
Many of us are having the same problem today. We are sold on
the ticket, but we aren’t clear just where we are going.

You Can’t Hide from Conflict

A British friend of mine once told me of a story in the early
1980s of a retired couple who were so alarmed by the threat of
nuclear war that they undertook a serious study of all the inhabited
places on the globe. Their goal was to determine where in the
66 MANAGING BY ACCOUNTABILITY

world would be the place least likely to be affected by a nuclear

war—a place of ultimate peace and security. They studied and
traveled, traveled and studied. Finally they found the place. And
on Christmas they sent a friend a card from their new home—in
the Falkland Islands. However, their “paradise” was soon turned
into a war zone by Great Britain and Argentina in the conflict,
now recorded in history books as the Falklands War.
The civil rights activist James Baldwin is credited with observ-
ing, “Most of us are about as eager to be changed as we were to be
born, and go through our changes in a similar state of shock.”
One of my favorite analogies on the subject of change and its
inevitability comes from management consultant Peter Vail. He
points out that society is rapidly changing and compares this to
living permanently in white water. You have two choices: either
jump out of the canoe or grab a paddle. If you have ever rafted,
you know that steering a course through white water is not an
easy task. Nor is living with constant change. Vail observes that
navigating the rapids is hard work: things are only partially under
control, yet the effective navigator of the rapids is not behaving
randomly or aimlessly. Intelligence, experience, and skill are being
exercised, albeit in ways that we hardly know how to perceive,
let alone describe. If you understand that responses to change are
normal and predictable—and that conflict is predictable—then
chances are that change can be managed.2
Studies have shown that the most common reaction to change
is resistance. I am sure you have experienced this. The reasons why
people resist change are many. Chief among them are excessive
uncertainty. If we don’t know where the next step will lead, we tend
to stay put. Our desire for familiar surroundings (or processes) is
strong. Change can also cause us to question our competence to
continue to do our job or to fear others questioning how we have
done that job in the past. Finally, resistance is fueled by the specter
of losing control. This is all very natural.
 Accept Inevitable Change and Conflict and Accountability’s Role 67

The Misconceptions Surrounding Conflict

Our attitude toward conflict shapes how we as leaders handle
conflict. What is your initial attitude toward conflict? Is it dread?
Denial? Maybe fear? Perhaps, “What a hassle!” How about pro-
crastination or deflection? (“Let someone else handle it.”) Or do
you accept conflict as a natural part of life, not preferred, but part
of the reality of leadership and choose to use it as a tool for growth
and progress? The last response is the wise and healthy response,
but also the most difficult.
Misconceptions about conflict do managers a disservice when
it comes to seeing the value in conflict and attaining resolution.
One misconception is that all conflict is negative. There are many
forms of conflict, from Supreme Court issues to scientific debate
to methods of child rearing between loving parents that sharpen
all of us and develop us as people. Admittedly, there is a differ-
ence between disagreement and conflict. It is, however, a fine line
and something as subjective as an individual’s personality may
cause one person to view a situation as a simple disagreement and
another to view the same situation as conflict.
Whichever end of the spectrum you are at, and whether or not
you perceive it as negative or positive, strongly shapes how you
handle it. If you perceive it as negative, you may attempt to do
anything to avoid it or get out of it as soon as possible. If you
see it as positive, not enjoying it, but embracing the potential
for growth, you will have a completely different approach and
outcome.
Another misconception is that people are always hurt by con-
flict. That is not true. It is similar to going to the dentist. I find no
joy whatsoever in going to my dentist, but the long-term results
are positive and in my best interest. One of the things I thoroughly
enjoy is deep political discussion. Not that I’m wise or profound,
actually more the opposite, but I am a good student and I love to
68 MANAGING BY ACCOUNTABILITY

learn. Tension can mount quickly over political convictions, but as

a result of some of the most difficult conversations, I have learned
the most. If I had beefed up my defenses, stopped listening, and
launched an attack, I may have felt victorious, but I would have
learned nothing.
A third misconception is that people are too fragile to handle
conflict. Someone once said, “Without conflict, there would be
no free market.” The business world is packed with conflict and it
is something anyone who wants to make an impact must manage.
In fact, conflict has tenable benefits for those who manage by
accountability if they look for them. Most important, conflict
helps discover the real you and the strength of your character.
Most of us will never be tested in as dramatic a way as was the
Old Testament character Job. But life has its way of testing us in
everyday ways as well. How do you react when someone cuts you
off while driving? What about when you receive an angry e-mail
from someone? Or a telemarketing call in the middle of dinner?
Your response reveals much about the real you. How little or how
much it takes to upset you gives great insights to your character.
How quickly you pursue positive solutions and forgiveness and
how slow you are to anger tells a significant story. We have much
to learn from conflict.
 Chapter 8

Help Others Around You to

Develop Personal
Accountability

There are two ways of spreading light: to be the candle or

the mirror that reflects it.
Edith Wharton

AT ONE TIME, the terminals that we had across the United

States were operating under what I labeled the “Burger King
Model.” Each unit was stand-alone, doing its job under the “Have
It Your Way” mantra. This side of our business was evolving into a
hodge-podge of widely varied procedures, reporting mechanisms,
execution strategies, and accountabilities. Each terminal was even
beginning to develop its own unique language and culture. It was
a real Tower of Babel. And it was getting out of control. . . .
We carefully studied the situation and came to the conclusion
that such a patchwork was not in the best long-term interests of
the organization. A new, standardized system was to be created and
implemented. Fundamental to this change was the introduction
of a standardized scorecard for our terminal superintendents and
their people. We were going to make managing by accountability
the way things got done.
70 MANAGING BY ACCOUNTABILITY

I remember the conference call we had with our folks to an-

nounce the new approach. The response was not very upbeat,
to say the least. One superintendent’s comments struck me in
particular.
He actually said, with all of his peers and superiors listen-
ing in, that such an accountability-based approach would make
things worse, not better. He went on to add that the inevitable
“combat”—and he used the word “combat”—which would cer-
tainly follow from his subordinates now being held accountable
would create more problems than they would solve.
I think every now and then about what he said and realize how
off base he was. Being driven by the natural fear that comes when
one considers conflict, he had assumed the worst-case scenario
and moved right to preparing for a combat assault.
Certainly managing by accountability makes conflict pro-
bable—and, in many cases, inevitable. However, assuming combat
is also a given is simply wrong. Combat is an option.
Accountability to others serves as a monitor of our own account-
ability pulse. It helps us to better understand how our personal ac-
countability measures up. However, as sensitive, self-serving crea-
tures, we sometimes chafe under another’s accountability simply
because we’re full of pride. Other times, we chafe because we sense
that something other than constructive guidance is being offered.
I’m convinced the superintendent on the conference call was
concerned about two things in particular: first was that he was
now going to be an “open book” and didn’t feel it necessary. His
pride was saying, “I am doing a great job here. My boss knows it.
I believe my subordinates know it. Why do I need to be further
scrutinized?”
Second, he was worried what his subordinates would think
when he had to do the same thing to them that now was being
done to him. He was scared they would hold him in contempt,
 Help Others Around You to Develop Personal Accountability 71

as he felt his superiors were now doing to him. He was taking it

personally and getting combative.
In my experience, this kind of thinking is not uncommon. In a
Charlie Brown cartoon, Lucy says, “You, Charlie Brown, are a foul
ball in the line drive of life. You stand in the shadow of your own
goal post. You are a miscue. You are three putts on the eighteenth
green. You are a seven-ten split in the tenth frame. You’re a missed
free throw, a called third strike. You are a dropped rod-and-reel in
the lake of life. Do you understand me, Charlie Brown? Have I
made myself clear?”
A lot of people have a Lucy in their life. Many times it is a lousy
boss who has stolen their confidence and their thunder. People
with this kind of baggage are often the ones who fight account-
ability at every turn. And, from a self-preservation point of view,
they are probably right. Nevertheless, however bad they had been
treated in the past is not a justification for ducking accountability.
It doesn’t absolve them of the responsibilities they are entrusted
with. It may sound hard-hearted. But if someone is not facing
themselves in the mirror everyday and having others do the same
to them, then they shouldn’t be in leadership positions. Nobody
put a gun to their head and said, “You must be a manager.” With
every position comes choice and accountability. If they choose
to take the job, then they must also accept wholeheartedly the
accountability that comes with it—regardless what has happened
before. Its really that simple.

The Importance of Scorecards

As our company moved forward to reshape the terminals
into a more singular structure with a focus on accountability,
it was incumbent upon me to first explain to our people why all
this was happening and then be certain the execution met the
72 MANAGING BY ACCOUNTABILITY

accountability objective. The route I chose was to implement a

scorecard system.
I am a big fan of scorecards. The transparency that comes
from effectively using scorecards leaves no doubt as to whether
the person is right or not for the job. It makes the job of a leader
much easier because those who consistently perform below average
are very much aware of it.
Like the batting average in baseball, which is the purest score-
card I know of, these low-output folks often put pressure on
themselves either to improve, look for another job, or take early
retirement. In any case, the ability of the leader is enhanced be-
cause potential obstacles in the form of human resources crises are
many times averted.
Moreover, the high-output folks are also aware that the low-
output ones have been put on notice without any insults or per-
sonal attacks, aka combat. This further expands the credibility of
the manager in the eyes of his or her achievers. It makes managing
by accountability less difficult to accomplish.

Scorecards and Balance

If executed properly, the scorecard method will make it quite

clear how someone is doing. This is easier said than done. I
remember a “Weekly Reader” cartoon when I was a kid:
A boy had lost his nickel and was looking for it on the street.
When asked by a passerby what he was doing, the boy replied he
was searching for the nickel that he had lost over there—pointing
across the street. When the passerby told him that he was looking
in the wrong place, the boy said, “I know. But the light is better
over here.”
In most businesses, people live and die by the numbers on their
scorecard. For many of these numbers, there are trade-offs that
have to or should be made for the good and betterment of the
 Help Others Around You to Develop Personal Accountability 73

manager’s own department or the good of the company. I have

seen many aspiring leaders deal away their credibility because they
manage to their numbers at all cost, even when it is obvious that
the decision is detrimental to the greater good.
I have had people publicly state that they know the right thing
to do is X but state that they’re going to do Y because of their
“numbers.” They are worried about themselves and what others
will think—nothing else. They are obviously not worried about
those around them who can see this very clearly. How can they
respect this individual who only hold themselves accountable to
numbers on a piece of paper? They really can’t.
Scorecards need to be looking for the right things in the right
places. And, they have to be right for the overall benefit of the
organization. They have to be balanced. If out of kilter even a little,
scorecards can render the fallacy, “the operation was successful, but
the patient died,” as true.

Mistakes Made When It Comes to Scorecards

Some common mistakes that are made when seeking to create
scorecards that empower management by accountability include
getting way too personal when it comes to criticism; ignoring
problems in the hope they will go away; and, over praising.

Getting Way Too Personal in Criticism

Over the years, I have collected some of the more memorable

quotes from scorecards that have passed by me. Ask yourself if
any, some, or all of these cross the line between professional and
personal:

“Since my last report, he has reached rock bottom and has

started to dig.”
74 MANAGING BY ACCOUNTABILITY

“His men would follow him anywhere, but only out of mor-
bid curiosity.”
“This guy slipped into the gene pool when no one was
looking.”
“This employee is really not so much of a has-been, but more
of a definitely won’t be.”
“Works well when under constant supervision and cornered
like a rat in a trap.”
“When she opens her mouth, it seems that this is only to
change whichever foot was previously in there.”
“He would be out of his depth in a parking lot puddle.”
“This young lady has delusions of adequacy.”
“She sets low personal standards and then consistently fails
to achieve them.”
“This employee should go far—and the sooner he starts, the
better.”
“This employee is depriving a village somewhere of an idiot.”
“A gross ignoramus—144 times worse than an ordinary ig-
noramus.”
“When his I.Q. reaches 50, he should sell.”
“She donated her brain to science before she was finished
using it.”
“If you give him a penny for his thoughts, you’d get change.”

We need to make sure that any comments which are made as

the results of scorecards are not done to ridicule or berate other
people. Managing by accountability demands the highest level of
integrity in all that we say and how we say it.
 Help Others Around You to Develop Personal Accountability 75

Ignore Problems in the Hope They Will Go Away

Hope is one of the greatest of all human traits. Without hope,
life has little or no meaning. When it comes to managing people,
an effective leader is grounded in the responsibilities they are
charged with, and with the hope that progress can be attained. In
many situations, because managers want to believe that the people
under them can do better, glaring problems are ignored. Reality
is replaced with hope. This is tough. We don’t want to be cruel.
We want to think the best in most people. That they can turn it
around. Change. Improve. But there are times when it is necessary
to cut someone loose.
The Cleveland Browns is one of the storied franchises in the
history of professional football. An original member of the Na-
tional Football League, Cleveland won four NFL championships
and reached the title game six other times during the 1950s and
’60s. During those years, future Hall-of-Famers like Jim Brown,
Otto Graham, and Leroy Kelly made their mark and built huge
fan followings in both Cleveland and around the country.
However, if you ask most Browns fans today who their favorite
player ever is, it is Bernie Kosar. The local boy who won a National
Championship as quarterback for the University of Miami and
returned home to lead the Browns to the playoffs throughout the
late 1980s stands above the other greats in team history.
In 1991, the Browns hired Bill Belichick, the now-three-time
Super Bowl winner, as coach. Unlike the fans of Cleveland, Be-
lichick was not a huge fan of Kosar. After a 29-14 loss to Denver
in week 8, the Browns released Kosar. Belichick told a press con-
ference Kosar was suffering from “diminishing skills.” Shockwaves
rippled throughout football-crazy Cleveland. Many said the un-
thinkable had happened.
Despite all the hype, the coach was right; Kosar’s performance
had trailed off in recent years. Still the release of the popular player
76 MANAGING BY ACCOUNTABILITY

set off a wave of anger among Browns fans, some of whom came
to the next home game in Kosar masks. Belichick was eventually
run out of town and later ended up in New England, where he
built a dynasty.
Belichick was and continues to manage by accountability, de-
spite the passion, allegiance, and love fans feel for their favorite
players. His ability to see through the emotion and look squarely
at the outputs has made him one of the most effective coaches in
NFL history.

Overpraising
I like what Emily Post said when she observed, “An overdose of
praise is like 10 lumps of sugar in coffee; only a very few people
can swallow it.” It is critical to tell people when they are doing a
good job. We all seek praise from those whom we value: a boss,
our parents, our spouses. But praise should be something that is
treated with the highest amount of respect. Overkill on praise can
ultimately lead to whacked-out expectations and confusion.

Some Guidelines for an Effective Scorecard

The ultimate decision of how to conduct a scorecard system is
up to each company and the people who lead it. Performance eval-
uations are intended to measure the extent to which the employee’s
performance meets the requirements of a particular position and to
establish goals for the future; strengthen the relationship between
you and the employee; open up channels of communication; ap-
praise past performance; recognize good performance; identify
areas that might require improvement; enable yourself to assess
your own communication and supervisory skills.
To help set parameters, I’ve included the following guidelines
to help leaders better implement their scorecards. They highlight
some strengths and weaknesses I have observed over the years.
 Help Others Around You to Develop Personal Accountability 77

Is the Scorecard Easy to Read and Understand?

The portion of a good scorecard that deals with performance is

concise and written in plain language that any member of the or-
ganization can readily understand. There is a manageable number
of performance indicators (goals and measures) that are clearly
stated so that any member of the organization can understand
their significance. In addition, the overall benefits that the organi-
zation achieves from the employee doing the scorecard are clearly
presented
Potential problem areas that may arise include a multitude of
performance indicators that require a voluminous performance
section to cover; lengthy, text-heavy narratives with limited use
of tables and graphics (people like pictures!); and, complicated
numbering of goals and measures. When it doubt, keep it simple!

Are the Performance Data Valid, Verifiable,

and Timely?
A good scorecard provides data sources for each reported in-
dicator and discloses any results that are missing for a significant
number of indicators due to lagging data. Be sure that the score-
card describes data verification and validation efforts as well as
data sources for individual indicators.

Are the Goals and Objectives of the Scorecard Stated

as Outcomes?
To the greatest extent practical, long-term (strategic) goals and
annual performance goals are expressed as measurable end out-
comes or at least intermediate outcomes that a lay reader can
readily understand and relate to tangible benefits. Where strategic
goals are stated at a high level of generality, they are accompanied
by strategic objectives that provide more specific and measurable
78 MANAGING BY ACCOUNTABILITY

outcomes. Good scorecards also capture all of an organization’s

key missions.
Potential problem areas here may be that many goals are stated
as activities or outputs rather than outcomes. Or, goals are stated
as outcomes, but too vaguely or at too high a level of general-
ity to permit realistic measurement or attribution of results to
the person’s efforts. And, individual goals are not clearly tied to
organizational benefits.

Does the Scorecard Show How the Person’s Results

Will Make the Organization Better?
The key ingredients in a successful evaluation are as follows:
identifying job standards; being consistent in measuring and com-
municating the extent to which whose standards are being met;
and providing opportunities for feedback and clarification.

Does the Scorecard Explain Failures to as to Why

the Person Failed to Achieve Their Goals?

The explanation of shortfalls should include a description of

planned actions to remedy them in the future, thereby adding to
the reader’s understanding of the shortfall and the reader’s confi-
dence that the shortfall is being seriously addressed. In situations
where confusion arises, the scorecard does not clearly disclose all
performance shortfalls. Either shortfalls are not specifically dis-
closed or the report must be read closely to find them.

Does the Scorecard Offer Suggestions for Growth

and Improvement?
No effective scorecard can be considered complete without
some discussion and assessment of the employee’s potential for
professional and career growth.
 Help Others Around You to Develop Personal Accountability 79

Fostering Accountability
Effective leaders recognize the need to help others around them
embark on a journey of personal accountability. Inherent in that
is fostering the right environment for personal accountability to
take root. Here are four ways to proceed.

Welcome It

We can work to avoid being defensive when people offer sug-

gestions, maintaining an open ear for feedback. When we protect
ourselves with defense mechanisms, we become hard, which is too
steep a price to pay.

Model It

Holding others accountable requires a willingness to confront

others with some difficult truths. At the same time, it models to
others how they can hold themselves accountable as well.

Use Opportunities to Teach about Accountability

We can talk about what we are doing and why—providing
insight as to what is going on to those who might be confused.

Never Question People’s Motives

Accusations are like weapons of mass destruction; they destroy

the entire area in a scorched-earth kind of way. When we wonder
what’s driving others, we can say, “I may be wrong, but it looks to
me like so-and-so happened. Tell me how you’re feeling about it.”
When we refuse to question others’ motives, they are less likely to
question ours.
 Chapter 9

Putting It All Together

We must not promise what we ought not, lest we be called

on to perform what we cannot.
Abraham Lincoln

TO BE ACCOUNTABLE, one demands a promise and an obli-

gation to fulfill an acceptance of the consequence or outcome,
positive or negative. It is, therefore, not unreasonable to expect
leaders to be responsible for the consequences of their actions to
the stakeholders and communities in which they operate.
In today’s borderless environment, accountability principles are
paramount to everybody’s interest. The right to know—whether
businesses act in an entirely accountable way, or whether their
actions will have profound implications on public interests—is
embedded as part of the accountability concept.
Indeed, many organizations have already moved in this
direction—they are becoming transparent, accountable, and ful-
filling their new roles with public interest at the heart of their
business strategy. The debate is not whether the purpose of busi-
ness is business but rather, whether it recognizes the need of cor-
porations to be accountable to their stakeholders and community
82 MANAGING BY ACCOUNTABILITY

at large. Such responsibility is no longer seems to be an option. If

this is true, then we have to get away from thinking that there is
more than one version of the truth. The truth must be treated as
absolute and singular.

Words Matter
Words matter. Not as much as actions. But they do matter.
David Mamet’s play Glengarry Glen Ross, which also became a
hit movie, is a scathing attack on how words can get obfuscated in
American business. The only characters whom we do not witness
in some attempt to steal from, cheat, or trick one of the others are
both extremely meek men who, it is implied, do not have much
chance at great success.
The sales office setting serves as a microcosm of truthlessness: as
the top man gets a Cadillac and the bottom man gets fired, every
man must not only work for his own success but also hope for—
or actively engineer—his coworkers’ failure. It is management by
attrition: I move up when you move down. The system is brutal
and compassionless.
Throughout the play, different characters use the word “talk”
(or variations of it) to imply idle chatter that is not supported
by action. One salesman tells another that what he learned in
business school is “talk”; another tries to figure out if his coworker
is serious about robbing the office or if he is just “talking”; another
tells a customer that his wife’s insistence on canceling their deal
is just something that she “said,” not something that they have to
actually do.
In every case, characters use this terminology in an attempt to
undermine the “talk” in question. Whenever someone does not
want to accept the reality of what is being said, they make an
accusation of “talk.” The would-be-thief cleverly suggests that he
himself is just “talking” about the break-in until he feels that his
verbal trap—to force his coworker to commit the robbery—is set.
 Putting It All Together 83

At that point, he reveals that he has actually been “talking” about

the break-in. The word is the same but his tone switches the word
“talk” itself from meaningless to meaningful.
Similarly, in the real world we too often find there is an overem-
phasis on words rather than the whole truth. Throughout my ca-
reer, I have found these phrases to be particularly vexing when it
comes to lack of dignity in using words:

“I know you don’t want to hear this, but . . .”

“I might get fired for saying this, but . . .”
“To be honest with you . . .”

Each of these sayings undermine the credibility of the person

saying them. Words represent us. They need to be treated accord-
ingly. Think about the opening of the Bible: “In the beginning
was the word. . . .”

Some Final Thoughts

Those who manage by accountability viscerally know that exter-
nal rules cannot substitute for character. That holding oneself ac-
countable is an acquirement—like music, like a foreign language,
like poker. Nobody is born with it. Managing by accountability
evolves over time within us.
There always exists a temptation when things don’t go well to
hide from responsibility and point fingers of blame away from
ourselves. We all did it as children and many of us have never lost
the trait.
Having completed this book, I have to assume that you want to
break away from that immature mindset to do things differently.
And I salute you. However, a piece of advice from someone who
has tried throughout his career to manage by accountability—
at times very well and at others quite poorly: be patient with
84 MANAGING BY ACCOUNTABILITY

yourself and don’t ever quit trying to do the right things for the
right reasons.
It is easy to set low expectations of yourself. You’ll never be
disappointed. . . .
It is tempting to forsake integrity as your guiding principle.
You’ll always be ready for the grey areas. . . .
It is much simpler to speak of action rather than to act. There
is little risk of failure if you don’t do anything. . . .
It is natural to run away from conflict and change. This way
everybody will like you. . . .
It is good to be known as a nice guy. . . . Holding others to
account makes life too complicated.
This is all true, unless you want to be a results-driven leader.
Managing by accountability is the greatest challenge any leader
will ever undertake. To hold themselves up for others to see. To
take responsibility when it is needed. To accept change and the
conflict it brings. To make it happen.
The rewards are clear: credibility, effectiveness, the opportunity
to have your people accomplish wonderful things, and an inner
satisfaction that is priceless. I conclude with words from Marcus
Aurelius, written nearly two thousand years ago:

If thou workest at that which is before thee, following right reason

seriously, vigorously, calmly, without allowing anything else to
distract thee but keeping thy divine part pure, if thou shouldst
be bound to give it back immediately, if thou holdest to this,
expecting nothing, fearing nothing, but satisfied with thy present
activity according to nature and with heroic truth in every word
and sound which thou utterest, thou wilt live happily. And there
is no man who is able to prevent this.
 Notes

Chapter 1: The Mandate of Accountability

1. The Nikkei Weekly, 12/13/2004 Edition.

2. Gareth Bladon and Kerry Cronin, “Accountability, respon-
sibility must be defined,” Business Day, Management Review Edi-
tion, February 27, 2006, Opinion & Editorial, p. 8.

Chapter 5: Live the Integrity Imperative

1. Warren E. Buffett, “Who really cooks the books?” The New
York Times, July 24, 2002.

Chapter 7: Accept Inevitable Change and Conflict

and Accountability’s Role
1. Robert Lacey. Ford: The Man and the Machine (New York:
Little Brown & Co, 1996.
2. Peter Vail. Spirited Leading and Learning: Process Wisdom for
a New Age (New York: Jossey-Bass, 1998).
 Recommended Reading

Bennett, William J. The Book of Virtues (Simon & Schuster, 1993)

New York.
Bennis, Warren and Burt Nanus. Leaders: The Strategies for Taking
Charge (Harper & Row, 1985) New York.
Bossidy, Larry. Execution: The Discipline of Getting Things Done
(Crown Books, 2002) New York.
Burns, James MacGregor. Leadership (Harper & Row, 1978) New
York.
Chamberlain, Joshua Lawrence. Bayonet Forward: My Civil War
Reminiscences (Stan Clark Books, 1994) Gettysburg, PA.
Ciulla, Joanne B., ed. Ethics, The Heart of Leadership (Quorum
Books, 1998) Westport, CT.
Cleveland, Harlan. Leadership and the Information Revolution
(World Academy of Art & Science, 1997) Minneapolis,
MN.
D’Este, Carlo. Eisenhower (Henry Holt, 2002) New York.
———. Patton: A Genius for War (Harper Collins, 1992) New
York.
Goleman, Daniel. Working With Emotional Intelligence (Bantam
Books, 1998) New York.
88 RECOMMENDED READING

Greenleaf, Robert K. Servant Leadership (Paulist Press, 1977) Mah-

wah, NJ.
Heifetz, Ronald A. Leadership without Easy Answers (Harvard
University Press, 1994) Cambridge, MA.
Kelley, Robert E. The Power of Followership: How to Create Leaders
People Want to Follow, and Followers Who Lead Themselves
(Doubleday Currency, 1992) New York.
McCullough, David. 1776 (Simon & Schuster, 2005) New York.
———. Truman (Simon & Schuster, 1992) New York.
———. The Path between the Seas (Simon & Schuster, 1977) New
York.
Oates, Stephen. With Malice Toward None: A Life of Abraham
Lincoln (Harper, 1994) New York.
Pelfrey, William. Billy, Alfred, and General Motors (AMACOM,
2006) New York.
Rost, Joseph C. Leadership for the Twenty-First Century (Praeger,
1991) Westport, CT.
Wren, J. Thomas, ed. The Leader’s Companion: Insights on Lead-
ership through the Ages (Free Press, 1995) New York.
 Index

A change, 61–64
accountability: and blame, Cleveland Browns, 75, 76
16–18; change, 61–64; Columbus, Christopher, 42
confidence, 55, 56; conflict, confidence, 55, 56
28; developing in others, 28, conflict, 28
71, 72; expectations, 27, 33, credibility, 28
34, 37, 38, 67, 68; integrity,
27, 34–38; meaning of, 21, 22; D
responsibility, 2, 18–20; David vs. Goliath, 46–49
scorecards, 71–75; teams, 8;
as a verb, 27, 52, 53 E
Aristotle, 35, 36 Enron, 42
expectations, 27, 33, 34, 37,
B 38
Back to the Future, 64
Bellichick, Bill, 75, 76 F
blame, and accountability, Ford, Henry, 60, 61
16–18
Boeing Corporation, 4 H
Buffett, Warren, 42 Hasselbeck, Matt, 17
Holmgren, Mike, 17
C Hurricane Katrina, 16
Cable News Network (CNN),
13 I
Cajon Pass, 11 integrity, imperative, 27, 33–38
90 INDEX

J S
Jackson, Thomas (Stonewall), 53, Saturn V rocket, 56, 57
54 scorecards, 71–75
Johnson and Johnson Seattle Seahawks, 17
Corporation, 25, 26 60 Minutes, 41, 42
Smithsonian Institute, 56–58
K
King James II, 4, 5 T
Knudsen, Robert, 60, 61 Taylor, Ike, 17
Kosar, Bernie, 75, 76 Thomarios, Paul, 56–58
Three Mile Island, 22, 23
M Tylenol, 25, 29
McNerney, James, 4
myrmecology, 52 U
United States Department of
N Transportation (USDOT), 14
NASA, 57–58 United Transportation Union, 14
National Transportation Safety
Board (NTSB), 12–14 V
Norman, Greg, 17, 18 virtue, 34, 35

P W
Perrier, 23–25 Walton, Sam, 31
Pittsburgh Steelers, 17
“pleasers,” 43–45 Y
preparedness, 54 “yes men,” 43–45
About the Authors
M. DAVID DEALY is Senior Vice President of Transportation for
Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad. A nearly 30-year veteran
of railroad management, he has served in top-level positions in
operations and marketing throughout the industry, as well as serv-
ing on the boards of several companies and non-profits, including
the National Alzheimer’s Association. With Andrew Thomas, he
is author of Defining the Really Great Boss (Praeger, 2004) and
Change or Die (Praeger, 2005).

ANDREW R. THOMAS is Assistant Professor of Marketing and

International Business and Director of the Center for Organi-
zational Development at The University of Akron. A successful
global entrepreneur, he has conducted business in more than 120
countries. A New York Times best-selling author, his books in-
clude Global Manifest Destiny and Aviation Insecurity, and, with
M. David Dealy, Defining the Really Great Boss (Praeger, 2004)
and Change or Die (Praeger, 2005). He is also co-editor of Direct
Marketing in Action (Praeger, 2006).