As part of my set of mandatory classes that all the new employees take, I took The Power of Personal Accountability in June of 2008, accompanied by this book.
In general, I try to maintain a hefty level of skepticism, especially for things like this which reek of the touchy-feely. But, this one seems to have a very interesting hook to it.
In the system presented, personal accountability is based upon two mirror-paths of decision making, separated into an accountability loop, and a victim loop. All situations lead to intentions/choices, which lead to either path:
1: the victim loop, in wich choices go- ignore, deny, blame, rationalize, resist, hide...
2: the accountability loop, in which choices go- recognize, own, forgive, self-examine, learn, act...
with each path intended to be the mirror of the other. The purpose of the training is to move employees to spend less time as victims and more time accountable for their actions. One of the creators of the system, Mark Samuel, says: "The only perfect people are victims. The rest of us are still learning." I approached the instructor afterward and asked her if they get a lot of heat for appropriating the word 'victim' in such a manner, and she said that yes indeed, they do get quite a bit of heat, and proceeded to try to defend it to me.
...except that no defense needed. There's certainly plenty to be said that the only way to not continually become a victim of circumstances lies in the way we approach and overcome our circumstances.
The interesting thing about the training is that because it is mandatory for all the employees in our division early in their career, it becomes a common language, common toolset, to begin speaking both up and down the command chain about actions and behaviors which harm the effectiveness of the organization. The question becomes, how am I going to take and use the toolset?
There was also an excellent point made about some of the traps that people fall into when holding others accountable: it's important not to (always) be a rescuer. Particularly among people of high skill, it's easy to fall into a pattern of "if it's not getting done, I need to do it", which is a behavior which doen't scale well in complicated situations.
Also discussed was the fact that there are often two zones on a scale of pain- the zone of comfort, and the zone of punishment. In between, however, is an area the instructor called the safety zone of discomfort; and she argued that the accountable, effective organization spend a lot of time in this zone, and look to ways to expand this zone. In fact, if you have a lot of highly skilled employees the zone of comfort often resides in being the rescuer in situations- you're most comfortable when you're working hard at the fix, finding the answers yourself. While it's important to do this some of the time, she makes an excellent argument here that the most effective organizations aren't built by loners, but by a lot of different people sharing pieces of the solution.
Lots to parse and work through- both content wise, and in a very meta-sense, where it's becoming very clear that there's an intentional set of values here at the company. More than just the usual "these are our core values" kind of bullshitting way that most of my prior companies have used. Not sure how I feel about all that; and not sure how I feel about feeling about that, if you know what I mean.