By Harmony Butler, CVBL, CCFP
In the line of work that I do, it is not uncommon for my fellow coaches and I to have conversations with leaders around their struggles with accountability in practice. They often share examples of what they’ve tried, the conversations they’ve had, the chances they’ve given, and the efforts they’ve invested; yet they still find themselves facing the same ongoing issues. Nothing seems to stick. Nothing truly changes.
Eventually, many leaders arrive at the same conclusion; I’ve done everything I can do. That realization is usually followed by the same questions: “What do I do now and how do I improve accountability for myself and the people I work with”.
Before those questions can be answered, it’s worth slowing down and examining what we actually mean when we say “accountability.” I’ll note that when accountability efforts fail, it’s rarely because leaders don’t care, it’s because what they are practicing doesn’t align with what accountability truly is.
According to Merriam-Webster, accountability is defined as “the quality or state of being accountable; especially an obligation or willingness to accept responsibility or to account for one’s actions”. That definition is simple, but powerful. It places responsibility at the individual level while emphasizing ownership and willingness, not fear or force.
With that definition in mind, it becomes easier to see why accountability breaks down in practice. Leaders often rely on approaches that feel productive in the moment but ultimately undermine ownership and growth.
What Accountability Is Not
Blame
Accountability is not blaming mistakes or shortcomings on circumstances, others, or bad luck. While external factors can influence outcomes, they do not remove responsibility. Blame may explain why something happened, but it does nothing to prevent it from happening again. Accountability involves action.
Avoidance
Avoidance does not help with accountability. Delaying difficult conversations or hoping issues resolve themselves only extends the problem. Excuses such as “I didn’t have time” or “we were too busy” may feel reasonable, but they quietly communicate that standards are flexible or that nothing is getting done about the situation. Over time, avoidance erodes trust, clarity, and creates a toxic culture.
Micromanaging
Holding someone accountable does not require controlling every step of the process. In fact, the actual definition of accountability states “…to account for one’s actions”. We as individuals are responsible for holding ourselves accountable. A leader’s role is to set clear standards, provide clarity, and model the behavior you expect from others while addressing problems directly, timely, and fairly. It is not to manage every detail.
Punishment
The most misunderstood aspect of accountability is that it is solely some type of punishment, consequence or penalty. When you treat accountability primarily as a consequence or penalty, it misses the purpose and produces the opposite desired result. Punishment focuses on what went wrong in the past. Accountability focuses on what must happen differently moving forward. When your accountability only exists of consequences to “send a message” or make an example of someone, accountability turns into control. Control may lead to short-term compliance, but not long-term accountability or improvement.
What Accountability Is
Taking Responsibility
Accountability begins with ownership. The state of being accountable exists when a person clearly understands their responsibilities, accepts ownership for their actions and outcomes, is willing to explain those actions, and takes responsibility for correcting course when expectations are not met. For leaders, this means ensuring expectations are clearly communicated and revisited when necessary. Did we speak with them when they didn’t follow through? Did we discuss and collaborate on a plan for them to improve or prevent the circumstances or situation? When individuals are involved in identifying the path forward, they are far more likely to stay engaged in it.
Follow-Through and Follow-Up
Accountability is not a one-time conversation; it’s a continued pattern. As a leader, are you following up with commitments, protocols, and expectations? Are you admitting when something didn’t work?
Many organizations rely on annual reviews but so much can happen in a year. It can be hard to even recall the last six months sometimes. Monthly one-on-ones, quarterly check-ins, and regular team meetings create rhythm and accountability in real time. Don’t wait until a problem happens. Follow up always, even when you’re busy or it’s uncomfortable.
Transparency and Communication
Effective accountability is proactive. Leaders who communicate openly about progress, challenges, and outcomes reduce uncertainty and build trust. Be transparent about all the progress, good or bad, as well as outcomes. If you don’t tell them, their minds will fill in the blank.
Transparency invites collaboration and feedback; it shows the people around you that you want them to be a part of the process and value their input. It creates a place of trust and increases psychological safety. Clear communication reinforces expectations and helps you to meet deadlines and quality standards consistently.
A Necessary Reframe
So, when leaders ask, “What do I do now and how do I improve accountability for myself and the people I work with”, the answer is rarely more pressure or harsher consequences. More often it is taking a moment to pause and reframe what accountability truly is. Accountability isn’t broken. What’s often broken is the way it’s understood and practiced. When leadership expectations are grounded in its true definition, accountability stops feeling like a struggle and starts becoming embedded in the culture.
About the Author
