Accountability Dynamics
Focus
The focus here is for producing desirable outcomes in organizations.
Results are what count in organizations, and managers are accountable for them. Popular issues like leadership, culture, innovation &c are simply means to an end: and so invoked as secrets, reasons or excuses. They must all be put to one side for now.
The have been identified as being about . Their use to design has been identified as the basis for the strongest possible structure. But closer inspection via this framework confirms what every CEO knows: line-management alone is not enough. Using what has been discovered, a fuller picture of can now be teased out.
In clarifying details, I assume knowledge of methods of managing and levels for structuring organizations.
Altering Reality
Remember: . Outputs are pure means.
The of is purposive in nature. That is natural because organizations are purposive systems, and we use purposes to design their structure.
Taking a whole organization perspective, it is notable (and either surprising or obvious depending on your viewpoint) that 6 of the are determined by HQ (i.e. at & ). See details.
The rationale for the lower five levels, operations, is to enable given to be converted into diverse outputs so that taken together they embody desired .
The internal duality of this hierarchy, created by the v outputs duality is values v systems—as shown in the diagram at right and explained below.
- establishes values and organizes them into a coherent and socially viable whole. This is the mission, vision and culture of the organization.
- adapts these values to specific circumstances, especially the mobilization of resources and development of priorities, leading to desired outcomes.
- follows values as given, and ensures the operations can and will produce the specified outcomes.
- has to deliver those outcomes via diverse specialized activities provided using systems, whose inputs and outputs are known (or knowable) in fair detail—at all times incorporating given values.
- establishes the specialised systems of activities so as to ensure efficiency and quality day after day and every day.
- adapts systems to the exigencies of particular complicated or tricky situations.
- follows systems so as to generate outputs.
Operations must engage with brute reality in a way that HQ can avoid. Fortunately, this is where line-management is possible and information systems can help. A tool to help ensure that engagement is effective is the map of as developed here.
Mapping Dynamics
The pattern of transitions from to may look simple and straightforward. However, in practice it is not so easy. The first task, already completed, is to sharply distinguish what goes on at each level. That permits design of a management structure for an organization and enables employment of suitably capable staff.
However, when staff actually use that structure in doing work, matters get more complicated because there is an instant activation of a tension-generating duality. Appreciating that tension allows for the construction of a dynamic map that represents requisite accountability processes in organizations.
Pursuit of this inquiry therefore requires the following standard steps:
- Consider the flow of accountability in moving up and down the hierarchy. «Down» is natural because values must influence actions.
- Identify the tension emerging in practice—the dynamic duality—so as to define Centres that define handling at each level in the hierarchy.
- Systematically consider whether and how each Centre directly influences the other Centres so as to enable the exercise of accountability.
-
Start at the end: see the final picture and focus on the terms used for processes.
OR
- Start at the start: with the roles and interactions in the .
Originally posted: 22-Feb-2014
