Review

The Message

Accountability is far more than just line-management. 22 accountability dynamics have been identified as requisite for large organizations. This complicated multiplicity of accountabilities is required because of the difficulty in organising outputs so that they generate desired outcomes, with operations embodying desired values.

Remember: People are not machines and reality is unknowable. This framework does justice to the complexity of reality and the complexity of people and groups.

Building the Tree

It has been necessary to focus on identity, policies, operations, programs, systems and outputs, and the way these are handled within and between Levels. (See a detailed analysis of the use of these terms.)

Understanding interactions between Levels requires:

  • structuring the appropriate hierarchical distribution of responsibility, and then
  • applying the systematic v responsive duality to create wholly realistic Centres where management work is performed.

Once the 10-Centre structure is formed, then the Tree framework can be developed by considering in turn:

  1. preventing disorder in Levels where Centres are naturally polarized
  2. pursuing the mission by joining adjacent Levels
  3. overcoming resistances by bypassing a Level of management
  4. establishing values by ensuring identity penetrates operations i.e. WL7-WL4

Better viewing: Use browser zoom if needed.

The Full Picture

Outcomes v Outputs is the internal duality of this Tree framework. As shown in the diagram:

  • the upper part (WL7-WL5) is about focusing on outcomes for the organization. This demands clarity about values: any desired outcome is itself the primary value for those in operations.
  • the lower part (WL4-WL1) is about focusing on outputs. This demands systems of activity: these are essential to efficiently use resources and coordinate work efforts.
  • THEE Note: The upper section dealing with the values is necessarily conceptual, and the lower section dealing with the activity systems is necessarily informational—in accord with its taxonomic origin from the using language typology. This is shown in the right hand column in the diagram.
  • The associated terms in green are currently believed to apply to all the work domains defined in this Q-expansion, but their value and significance is uncertain.

    • This framework for accountability dynamics is not wholly intuitive and is unlikely to be generated by either armchair philosophizing or empirical studies. It has been developed by working closely with managers, analysing demands placed on them, watching how they spontaneously behave, and analysing situations when all agree that things have gone wrong.

    This Tree framework is focused on accountability. It is not restrictive in regard to staff interaction. Staff at any level may communicate and cooperate with staff at any other level in relation to the work-to-be-done. In any case, organizations absolutely require other forms of social interaction:

    More

    Originally posted: 28-Feb-2014