Existence is prelude to Essence – Lead: Culture of Accountability & Ownership

Every human and social construct endeavours towards fulfilment of a reality that takes us near to the essence in terms of retention of thoughts, faith, belief, and managing the meaning of essence. People are usually excited by change, adventure, and excitement, because they are dynamic, visionary, and versatile. They are designed to make constructive use of freedom, by being changeable, restless, untidy and rebellious, and hence being governed by traditions and rituals at an individual level or organization level, often comes across as an irritant. Organizations experience issues of hiding problems, wait until told, turf wars, fault-finding, and hoarding decision-making authority. An irritant is not a waste however not being able to understand the collateral damage caused by the irritant qualifies it to be a waste. 

“Isness is diametrically opposite to otherness and hence may lack a beginning since the centrality is different.”

Organizations need to hold people accountable for fulfilling their commitment to job descriptions, and behaviour that are consistent to values and missions of the organization. The irritants are inescapable, both, in reality and fundamental, however identifying and owning these irritants can be force multiplier while having diversity in perspectives and inclusively addressing fast changing markets, consumer behaviours, artificial intelligence, technology, and geopolitical interest and threats. We are individually and collectively impacted by them.

In a VUCA world that is not good enough to remain competitive since the disruptions resides in in competition. The world of disruption and innovation does originate in competition and is fundamentally relational. Pepsi and Coke are competitors to each other and they will coexist, however their worry is competition in form of tea, coffee and other energy drinks and that can upset their survival. We all compete with each other, and that’s a wonderful sign of inertia and feel secure and happy with our jobs, however the Irritant breathes in competition that can take away what we do - Technology is beginning to make us nervous!

“Organizational culture eats strategy for breakfast, lunch and dinner so don’t leave it unattended.” - Peter Drucker

Almost all Organizations seek deep transformation however are unable to recognize the organization inertia which include mental models (cognitive schemata), internal politicking framework that indulges in distribution of power and influence, strategic commitment and capabilities that deals with investment in tangible and intangible assets to support a particular way of doing business- An actual business model. These are the hard arenas that allow optimization and are our conscious biases. The transformational themes are filtered through the lenses of optimization and the result is optimization.

Attending is when we recognize those decision- making factors and the unconscious conspiracy in a continued form leads to status quo and routine inertia. The existing forces that threaten the best-laid plan by keeping routine that absorbs, both, time and energy doesn’t demystify of the real impact of human potentialities.  The dichotomy between what is said and done is significant and demands attention. The pain of transformation is a marathon in sprint and it happens when the culture eats and reflects on those repeat patterns of how people think and respond, many a times we seek confirmations, and relying on tried and tested while working on future strategy, innovative ideas, capability maps and success – the contrasts need attention.

“The organizations narratives are essentially directed towards Accountabilities”

Accountability is a process of linking an entity to an issue. Accountability is a relational context and hence we are responsible to adhere to the rules, explain or justify. In situations such as not being on time, code of conduct, scheduling, reports and returns, meeting with deadlines, upskilling, appearance, treating everyone with respect, job details, and being answerable and responsible for one’s actions- our world, the world of existence. These linkages lead to transactional leadership and are concerned with the status quo in form of optimization and day-to-day progress towards goals, and somewhere deep inside us we desist being accountable.

Some of the successful managers are impressed by their repeat success that they form a belief that more of the same type of effort is the way to future success. They have developed a powerful model of what works. When faced with changing circumstances, shifting landscapes of complexities, new competitors and technology they become particularly vulnerable as their model of what works doesn’t seem to work any longer. Our belief is something we are committed to, and commitments have a longer stay, and hence difficult to change.

The issues of accountability in organizations and in our own lives loom large and there is always an urgent need to integrate them into the cultural fibres and every time the emphasis is on values and behaviours. A cultural fibre that that acknowledges the prevalence of existing unaddressed patterns (inertia) yields heightened sense of values and behaviours. This can be achieved through a reflective response of personal power and being in charge with well thought out choices.

“Transformations are opportunities to rethink priorities and intentional habits”

The left brain is management and rules through rules books, and Functional standards, TQM and productivity enhancement programs, whereas the right brain values trusts and leads through effort, example and influence. It shapes out of attributes such as curiosity, courage, and creativity. Leadership is and has always been a choice. The left brain is given whereas the right brain is a choice to deal with opposite counterpart such as sourness, pessimism, fear, mindlessness, and boredom while dealing with accountabilities.

To make a transition to the world of ownership which is a right brain function than the left-brain, where accountabilities are stored, needs a larger investigation. There is this a major shift that happens when you resist anchoring, by default, into convergent mindset and keep out options to view ideas, thoughts and practices from a divergent mindset. Kodak is one example where the middle management was habituated with convergent mind set while the organization was desperately exploring divergence in products, services, competition and markets. We all know the outcome!

The left linear brain and right relational brain have different set of urgencies. While meeting clients, the left brain goes for the close; right brain is building relationships. When organization runs into deep waters, the left brain is fixing the immediate problems; the right brain senses the need that lifts the spirit.

“A culture of ownership is not created by economic interest, it springs from emotional commitment”

Ownership is what you expect from yourself and essentially anchored into intrinsic motivation and coils from pride, engagement and autonomy. Intrinsic motivation paves path for purpose, mastery and autonomy that leads to choosing and living your values, being emotionally present, transparency, asking right questions, thinking entrepreneurially, thinking your dreams, putting one’s heart into work and caring.

In absence of a parlance the organization enters in a state of cyclic motions of non-productivity and invisible waste.

The feel aspect forms transformational leadership, that has linkages to value creation and positive change, a vision that enhance motivation, role modelling, collective identity, engagement and an inclusive approach that leads to ownership. A continuous eye need to be maintained as to who leads whom? Accountability precedes outcome and ownership precedes mine-ness that goes in building a culture that inspire.  

A body or a practice will preserve its velocity and direction – unless you exercise personal power on it through exemplification.

‘Our internal constructs are external fronts”

The accountabilities optimize whereas ownership foresees innovations and deals with newness. Dealing with newness is not easy and this is where we put small soul in large company body. As Albert Einstein said that the things which can be counted don’t always count, and the things that cannot be counted often really do count. An investigative and reflective question, if sustained, can lead to significant grip over doing the right things.  

 The process to ownership and accountability can be seen through the lens of:        

(a) Transparency (b) Participation (c) Evaluation (d) Response

The first two are also known as proactive approaches. Initiating a new technology, or other transformative changes, preparing a business case, anticipated cost benefit analysis, risk analysis, bottlenecks and exercising an influence for an inclusive approach are proactive measure being attributed to ownership.  

The last two forms the final steps to evaluate the results of new initiative and to provide reflective response to explain and explore thereby leading to optimization or closure or continue. This we apply while dealing with market, governments, economies, regulators, performance, productivity standards, line balancing, or our own lives leading to a larger consciousness. An essence prevails s as long as existence flourishes.

Humans and social outfits exist first before they have a meaning in life and meaning is not given and must be achieved. Perceiving an experience is a function of senses that is given to all, shaping your experiences and being in search of a meaning guides us to narratives that are compelling and consummates the desire to lead from the front.