Regulatory Accountability vs Integrity Accountability

by Kelle Olwyer

Open your ears. . . look around. . . What do you hear as your company’s unofficial motto? Do you notice people carrying and promoting the motto of “It’s not my fault; I’m being accountable for what I was told to do; I can’t do anything; it’s not up to me”? Or are you hearing words like, “I have to find a way to make this work for all of us; I’ll make sure that it happens; I believe this is the best thing for the company; where is the value in this course of action?”

The difference between these two forms of responses are what I call regulatory accountability vs. integrity accountability.

Regulatory accountability exists when an organizational culture is set up to honor “sacred cows” that no longer serve the organization or its competitive future. A “sacred cow,” as I am defining it, is: a viewpoint or practice regarded as above criticism or attack, which ultimately ends up in a firmly held belief that it isn’t working. When sacred cows exist in an organization and have been entrenched for long periods of time, regulatory accountability finds a fertile ground to breed. It is [personified] by finger-pointing, individuals holding grudges about policy or other persons, and withholding information for personal use, among other things.

Regulatory accountability is insidious in that it promotes behavior that meets the required job description responsibilities, but little else. People feel powerless to affect their organization’s patterns of action or destiny, and become frustrated or demoralized as a result. People do what their jobs require, but no one is willing to risk taking action to correct what they feel is out of integrity in their organization, departments, on their teams, or even in their own individual work. As a result, people become concerned with what the company is doing and how it is doing it, yet spend a lot of time worrying, feeling helpless and becoming locked into excuses as to why nothing can be done.

Integrity accountability is behavior that meets the deeper values of the organization and the individual himself. In such an environment, people question openly what isn’t working or consistent and act for the good of the whole. I have found this behavior in organizations where people feel they are an important part of something “large” and are making important contributions to the organization and its direction.

Just some of the characterizations associated with integrity accountability are the sharing of information in ways that enhance a develop many individual’s skills and knowledge; ongoing conversations questioning purpose and value of actions as directly related to organizational goals; the ability to recommend– and be listened to –that a projects and actions be changed or stopped because they do not support business needs and goals; pride in accomplishment; the desire to succeed no matter what difficult circumstances surround the situation, and the desire at all levels to participate in the formulation and setting of direction for the organization.

Companies that are imbued with integrity accountability have people who do not point fingers, but rather, try to work out problems together with peers and superiors. They do not hold grudges about policies, but rather have access to information that helps them to understand the need, at the time, for the policy, which they then do their best to support; people feel empowered to speak out, to express concerns and to take action for the good of the whole.

What can you do if your organization is stuck in regulatory accountability

Start in your own back yard. What do you notice as the common themes among your employees? Talk to other managers and your supervisors and ask them to observe, then compare your information. Determine yourself, or with like-minded peers, which changes you want to institute that will be the first steps in going from Regulatory accountability to integrity accountability. Examples are:

• If you notice a pattern of finger-pointing, develop a practice for pointing the finger at “self” first to determine which parts of “the buck” are being passed.

• If you notice a pattern of excuse-making, insist they determine what they can do rather than what they can’t.

• If you notice a pattern of “It’s not up to me,” insist that employees study alternatives and make recommendations for next steps with attached data that backs up their research and recommendations.

These are just some examples of what can be done to begin to move the patterns of regulatory accountability toward integrity accountability. And of course, be sure to have your employees participate in determining what unhelpful behaviors are currently running through your department and in generating ideas for transforming them toward integrity accountability.