Listen to this article:
Abstract: This article provides a step-by-step guide for holding people accountable in the workplace in a meaningful way that supports performance improvement and builds trust between managers and direct reports. Drawing from scholarly literature and the author's 15+ years of management consulting experience, key best practices are outlined for establishing clear performance expectations, monitoring progress through ongoing feedback, addressing performance gaps respectfully, and leading accountability discussions with empathy. Specific strategies are presented for setting behaviorally-specific goals jointly with employees, tracking metrics over time, providing balanced constructive feedback regularly, diagnosing root causes of issues versus blame, and focusing on solutions rather than past mistakes. Empirical research is cited throughout demonstrating the interpersonal and business benefits of accountability when applied judiciously through transparency, mutual understanding and genuine care for individuals' development. The article aims to help managers successfully navigate this important yet delicate aspect of people leadership.
As a management consultant with over 15 years of experience helping organizations drive performance improvement through accountability, I have seen first-hand both the benefits and challenges of holding people accountable. While accountability is critical for goal achievement, quality control, and organizational success, it is also one of the most challenging aspects of leading others. Getting accountability wrong can damage relationships and negatively impact engagement, motivation and retention. However, with the right approach, accountability can help maximize individual and team potential while building trust between managers and their direct reports.
Today we will explore practical, evidence-based guidance for holding people accountable in a way that is meaningful, respectful and gets results. Drawing from scholarly research, case studies from my consulting work, and lessons learned over many years of managing teams and implementing accountability systems, I will outline a step-by-step approach for establishing clear expectations, monitoring performance, providing feedback and implementing consequences when needed.
Defining Accountability
Before delving into how to operationalize accountability, it is important to define what exactly is meant by the term. At its core, accountability refers to the obligation to account for one's behaviors, actions and decisions, and to accept responsibility for the resulting outcomes (Karambayya & Brett, 1989). It involves both transparency around performance standards and transparency around performance itself (Latham & Wexley, 1994). When done well, accountability fosters a sense of personal responsibility to meet commitments, complete tasks and achieve goals that have been mutually agreed upon between a manager and their direct report (Salas & Cannon-Bowers, 2001).
However, accountability is not just about results - it is also about the process. For accountability systems to work and avoid damaging relationships, managers must ensure expectations are well-defined and understood, provide ongoing feedback and support, and have consequences that are reasonable, consistent and aim to help the individual improve (Shoss et al., 2013). When employees feel their performance is being monitored judiciously and they have opportunities to grow in their role, accountability tends to boost engagement rather than create stress or distrust (Gilbert et al., 2010). With this definition and framework in mind, let us now explore the key steps and best practices for holding others accountable in the workplace.
Establishing Clear Expectations
The starting point for any accountability system is ensuring expectations are crystal clear from the outset. Much interpersonal conflict and lack of alignment can be avoided when managers take the time up front to articulate exactly what is needed from their direct reports. Research demonstrates this upfront clarity is crucial, as vague or ill-defined expectations typically lead to ambiguity, frustration and feelings of being unfairly judged later on (Wang et al., 2014).
Use behaviorally-specific language when outlining goals, priorities, standards and deadlines. Instead of generic terms like "improve customer service", define expectations as clear actions like "respond to 95% of emails within one business day".
Involve employees in goal-setting when possible. Getting input and buy-in at the outset fosters commitment and ownership of agreed upon targets (Alvertis et al., 2018).
Document expectations in writing. Whether through a formal performance management system, project plans or one-pagers, having clear documentation that both manager and direct report sign-off on eliminates "he said, she said" later on.
Revisit expectations periodically. As priorities evolve, check that expectations stay relevant and make adjustments proactively through collaboration.
These upfront steps not only clarify what success looks like, but also establish accountability as a collaborative process focused on development rather than gotcha-style evaluations.
Monitoring Performance and Providing Feedback
Once expectations are set, managers must systematically track performance against the agreed upon standards. Just as important, ongoing feedback helps employees course-correct in real-time and rewards a job well done. Research demonstrates the power of frequent, candid feedback for sustaining motivation and coaching improvement (Greguras & Robie, 1998; London & Smither, 2002).
Some best practices include:
Schedule regular check-ins (i.e weekly 1:1s) to discuss progress, roadblocks and feedback.
Use project management tools, performance dashboards and other systems to factually track key metrics over time.
Provide balanced feedback on both strengths and opportunities for growth. Focus on behavior, not personality.
Ask for the employee's perspective and ensure two-way dialogue.
Give feedback close to the timeframe of the relevant behaviors to maximize retention and impact.
Recognize and reward wins publicly to motivate continued strong performance.
When monitoring is done judiciously through respectful two-way communication versus "gotchaism", employees tend to view the process positively and see managers as invested in their success.
Addressing Performance Gaps
No matter how clearly expectations are set or how diligently performance is monitored, there will inevitably be times when an employee is not meeting standards. This is where accountability can get trickiest for managers. Left unaddressed, performance gaps erode results and demotivate high performers. Yet handled poorly, consequences come across as punitive rather than corrective.
Research shows a few best practices when performance falls short (Gabriel et al., 2014):
Have a private, candid discussion to diagnose root causes versus attacking or accusing. Listen to understand perspectives.
Agree on specific, measurable actions and a deadline for improvement. Provide extra support and guidance.
Document the discussion and action plan for future reference since "coaching is caring."
Follow up with frequent feedback and make course corrections as needed.
Only as a last resort, implement formal consequences if NO improvement after support. Tie directly to initial expectations.
When managers apply natural justice and seek to understand rather than be understood, accountability discussions shift from punitive to a chance to help employees grow. Teams feel respected, motivated to improve and willing to be candid about challenges.
Leading with Empathy
No matter how closely managers monitor performance, set clear expectations and give feedback, holding people accountable can still be emotionally charged at times. This is where the "human" side of leadership truly distinguishes the best managers. Research shows empathy - the ability to understand others' perspectives and emotions - leads to more successful accountability discussions that boost engagement and trust in the long run (Liden et al., 2006; Simpson et al., 2012).
Some principles of leading with empathy include:
Presume positive intent. Don't assume employees are intentionally underperforming - most want to succeed.
See through the eyes of your employees. Put yourself in their shoes to appreciate pressures and challenges they face.
Communicate care, not just high standards. Let employees know you believe in their ability to improve.
Be solution-focused versus critical. Look for how to enable success versus dwell on past mistakes.
Respect employees as whole humans. Accountability is one aspect of work - don't reduce them just to their job performance.
When managers lead with empathy, accountability feels like a supportive process rather than a scary judgment of someone's overall competence or value. Employees feel motivated to step up for managers who have their genuine best interests in mind.
Conclusion
In today's evolving world of work, holding people accountable well is more important than ever. Yet as this research brief outlines, it is equally crucial to do so through open communication, mutual understanding and genuine care for individuals' development versus just tasks or results. When managers establish crystal clear expectations collaboratively, provide ongoing supportive feedback, address issues respectfully and lead with empathy, accountability transforms from a necessary "evil" into a positive force for maximizing both performance and human potential. By focusing first and foremost on understanding employees' perspectives, managers can help steer accountability discussions towards solutions rather than conflicts. With consistent application of evidence-based best practices, performance management through accountability need not undermine engagement or trust—in fact, it can strengthen them.
References
Karambayya, R., & Brett, J. M. (1989). Managers handling disputes: Third-party roles and perceptions of fairness. Academy of Management Journal, 32(4), 687–704. https://doi.org/10.5465/256524
Latham, G. P., & Wexley, K. N. (1994). Increasing productivity through performance appraisal (2nd ed.). Addison-Wesley.
Salas, E., & Cannon-Bowers, J. A. (2001). The science of training: A decade of progress. Annual Review of Psychology, 52(1), 471–499. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.471
Shoss, M. K., Jundt, D. K., Kobler, A., & Reynolds, C. R. (2013). Doing bad to feel better? An investigation of within- and cross-person perceptions after workplace deviance. Journal of Business Ethics, 116(1), 137–151. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1449-6
Gilbert, J. A., Raffo, D. M., & Sizer II, P. G. (2010). The relationship among organizational moral intensity, perceived organizational support, and extra-role behaviors. Journal of Business Ethics, 90(2), 189–199. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-010-0434-2
Wang, A. C., Tai, C. C., Ku, G., & Galinsky, A. D. (2014). Perspective-taking increases willingness to engage in intergroup contact. PLoS ONE, 9(1), Article e85681. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0085681
Greguras, G. J., & Robie, C. (1998). A new look at within-source interrater reliability of 360-degree feedback ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(6), 960–968. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.83.6.960
London, M., & Smither, J. W. (2002). Feedback orientation, feedback culture, and the longitudinal performance management process. Human Resource Management Review, 12(1), 81–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1053-4822(01)00043-2
Gabriel, A. S., Daniels, M. A., Diefendorff, J. M., & Greguras, G. J. (2014). Emotional labor actors: A latent profile analysis of emotional labor strategies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100(3), 863–879. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037408
Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., Zhao, H., & Henderson, D. (2006). Servant Leadership: Development of a multidimensional measure and multi-level assessment. The Leadership Quarterly, 19(2), 161–177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2008.01.006
Simpson, A. V., Clegg, S., & Pitsis, T. (2012). "I’m sorry, I don’t have time": Academics’ neglect of organizational ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 106(3), 339–355. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-1005-8
Additional Reading
Westover, J. H. (2024). Optimizing Organizations: Reinvention through People, Adapted Mindsets, and the Dynamics of Change. HCI Academic Press. doi.org/10.70175/hclpress.2024.3
Westover, J. H. (2024). Reinventing Leadership: People-Centered Strategies for Empowering Organizational Change. HCI Academic Press. doi.org/10.70175/hclpress.2024.4
Westover, J. H. (2024). Cultivating Engagement: Mastering Inclusive Leadership, Culture Change, and Data-Informed Decision Making. HCI Academic Press. doi.org/10.70175/hclpress.2024.5
Westover, J. H. (2024). Energizing Innovation: Inspiring Peak Performance through Talent, Culture, and Growth. HCI Academic Press. doi.org/10.70175/hclpress.2024.6
Westover, J. H. (2024). Championing Performance: Aligning Organizational and Employee Trust, Purpose, and Well-Being. HCI Academic Press. doi.org/10.70175/hclpress.2024.7
Citation: Westover, J. H. (2024). Workforce Evolution: Strategies for Adapting to Changing Human Capital Needs. HCI Academic Press. doi.org/10.70175/hclpress.2024.8
Westover, J. H. (2024). Navigating Change: Keys to Organizational Agility, Innovation, and Impact. HCI Academic Press. doi.org/10.70175/hclpress.2024.11
Jonathan H. Westover, PhD is Chief Academic & Learning Officer (HCI Academy); Chair/Professor, Organizational Leadership (UVU); OD Consultant (Human Capital Innovations). Read Jonathan Westover's executive profile here.
Suggested Citation: Westover, J. H. (2024). Managing Performance Through Accountability. Human Capital Leadership Review, 15(2). doi.org/10.70175/hclreview.2020.15.2.2
