Friday Forward - Blind Accountability (#499)

Leaders who rely too heavily on context to judge behavior often see their organizations suffer

Two weeks ago, I wrote a Friday Forward called Feeling Accountable that discussed the importance of validating people’s feelings while also holding them accountable for poor behavior driven by those emotions. I got tons of replies, including one from a doctor friend who shared he used the framework several times since reading the post, including with a patient who was verbally abusing his staff.

Reflecting on that post and some of the leadership debates I’ve had over the past year, I realized it crystallized another important principle: the danger of applying inconsistent standards based on context. In these discussions, people often let compassion lead them to justify behavior that is objectively wrong.

It’s natural to consider context when evaluating someone’s behavior. Life is complicated and you never know what someone is going through. But while context may prove useful in assigning consequences, it should not lead to condoning behavior that violates rules, values, or trust.

When leaders move the red line in response to clear infractions, both the people crossing the line and observers will be emboldened to push things further. Leaders who rely too heavily on context to judge behavior often see their organizations suffer the consequences of unclear standards, perceived favoritism, and loss of credibility.

To help explain this, I created a visual I call the Behavior Wall.

On one side of the wall is context, the why behind someone’s action. On the other side is the behavior itself, presented objectively. When you look at a situation as a leader, you only see the behavior, because the tall, opaque wall blocks the context on the other side.

If you believe certain behavior is unacceptable when judged in isolation, then you should hold it to the same standard no matter what context sits on the other side of the Behavior Wall.

For example:

• An employee misses a critical deadline without telling their manager. Was it because they were too busy and forgot, or because they were going through a painful divorce and distracted? The context might affect your level of empathy, but the behavior—failing to communicate about a vital deadline—is unacceptable no matter what.

• A group of students disrupt a graduation ceremony. Was it for a political cause, or a fraternity prank? The motivations differ, but the behavior—ruining an important event for others—remains the same.

• Someone throws a glass at their spouse. Was it because they caught them cheating, or because they didn’t do the dishes? Throwing a glass should never be acceptable, even if the actions that preceded it are unforgivable.

In each case, the Behavior Wall forces you to evaluate the action itself, not the justification behind it.

Too often, leaders try to peer over the Behavior Wall. They overlook a team member’s outburst because “they’ve had a tough month.” They excuse a policy breach because “their intentions were good.” These decisions are a slippery slope to perceived favoritism and resentment. They also reveal in-group bias: we are more likely to rationalize the behavior of people we like or identify with, and more likely to condemn those we do not.

The Behavior Wall prevents this bias from creeping in. It forces you to clarify what is and is not acceptable in your organization regardless of contextual circumstances.

This does not mean you should disregard context entirely. Once you have acknowledged that a behavior requires accountability, you can then look over the Behavior Wall and assess context to guide your response. Was it a one-time mistake? Has the person shown remorse and a willingness to improve? Those factors might warrant some grace or support, but they should not change the original evaluation of the behavior itself, nor remove accountability altogether.

When leaders model this clarity, they send a powerful message about consistent values, standards, and expectations for the organization and the community. They also show that expectations apply to everyone equally, which builds trust, accountability, and cohesion in teams.

If you have found yourself rationalizing or excusing poor behavior lately, I encourage you to visualize the Behavior Wall. Ask yourself: Would I accept this behavior if I did not know the backstory? If you wouldn’t, call the behavior out for what it is: unacceptable. Context can shape your empathy, but it should not and cannot erase accountability.

Quote of The Week

“Right is right even if no one is doing it; wrong is wrong even if everyone is doing it.” – Saint Augustine

Have a great weekend!

-Bob
robertglazer.com

Check Out The Better Leader Newsletter

• The Most Common Core Values Are Ineffective

• Hiring Success Is All About Expectations

• Get Clarity With Nine Questions