View RALI news and insights to keep up to date with the latest on trend developments relating to future leadership capability and experience requirements and the future world of work.
About 35% of current jobs in the UK are at high risk of computerisation over the following 20 years, according to a study by researchers at Oxford University and Deloitte. Go to http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-34066941 and type your job title into the search box below to find out the likelihood that it could be automated within the …
As companies work to build more inclusive, high-performing workplaces, one major workforce issue is still hiding in plain sight: menopause. Around 1 billion women globally are currently in perimenopause, menopause, or postmenopause, equating to roughl…
Kids in Norway and Wisconsin drew the same thing when asked what they want to be: a YouTube logo.
When I was in HR, I watched managers dodge conversations about accountability like they were land mines. Not because they didn’t care, but because accountability had become synonymous with one thing: firing.
Accountability has become corporate profanity. Because when you say it, everyone braces for impact.
Here’s what needs to change: Accountability isn’t a disciplinary action. It’s a process. And when managers treat it that way—starting from day one, not “today’s your last day”—everything changes.
The problem isn’t accountability. It’s the timing.
Starting at the beginning
Most managers wait until something goes wrong to bring up accountability. When an account executive misses their Q2 goal? Here comes the accountability conversation. That feels like a threat. A call center employee gets a one-star rating from a customer? Suddenly, accountability feels like blame. The employee gets defensive and the manager gets frustrated . . . but nothing actually gets better.
But what if accountability started at the beginning?
Let’s take this scenario. You’re a sales director, and it’s July 1. Your team has a Q3 goal: $2.5 million in new revenue. Here’s what most managers do: Announce the number, maybe send a follow-up Slack, then mention progress in weekly meetings like it’s background noise. You acknowledge challenges and tell them to focus on next week. Rinse, repeat.
Then September 20 hits. The team’s only tracking to $1.8 million. You announce, “This is unacceptable. We’re all going to be held accountable.” The team feels blindsided—not because they didn’t know the goal, but because no one treated it as real until there was a crisis.
Now here’s the other way.
On July 1, you sit down with each rep and say:
“We’re accountable to $2.5 million as a team. That means you’re accountable to your number. I’m not going to surprise you after the quarter’s over. Here’s what that looks like: Every week, I’ll ask about your activity—conversations, pipeline, what’s getting in the way. You come prepared with ideas on how to move things forward. We share what’s working as a team. We’re tracking and adjusting in real time, not scrambling in September.”
Then, you actually do that. You meet as a team and everyone shares their tactics and ideas. You meet with team members and ask: What’s realistic for August? What calls do you need to make? Where do you need help? What’s the sticking point?
By mid-September, if the team’s below goal, you already know it. You’ve had five conversations about it. You know if it’s a pipeline problem, a skill problem, a territory problem, or a motivation problem. You know what to adjust.
That’s accountability. That’s not punishment—that’s partnership.
The account executive example is straightforward because it’s a clear number. But other roles, such as call center agents, are more subjective. You can’t measure just “calls answered.” You need quality, patience with angry customers, and judgment calls that are hard to script, let alone measure.
How to build it
So how do you build accountability for something like customer satisfaction when every call is different?
You start the same way. Don’t wait for a bad call recording or a complaint to surface. You set the frame early:
“We’re accountable to getting our CSAT score to 85%. That means when someone calls upset, we’re not matching their emotion. We know that they’d probably rather be doing anything other than having to call us. But we’re listening, validating, and solving. You won’t handle every call perfectly—but here’s what matters: After each one, think about what you did. Did you listen for what was actually wrong, or did you just try to close out the call? Did they feel heard, or just processed?”
Then—and this is the part most managers skip—you actually review calls and do it with curiosity, not a “gotcha” checklist.
You listen to a tough call together. A customer was furious: poor service and yet another billing error. Your team member stayed calm, acknowledged their understandable frustration, and then dug into the system, fixed it, and the customer actually thanked them by the end.
You say: “Walk me through what you did there. How did you know to dig into the billing system when they were angry about the service?”
Your team member says: “They mentioned calling three times before. I figured the real problem wasn’t today—it was that nobody fixed it the first time. So I did.”
That’s the conversation—and accountability.
Compare that to the manager who reviews the same call, pulls up the compliance checklist, and opens with: “You didn’t mention the hold time disclaimer until the 45-second mark.”
One builds capability, and one builds resentment.
This isn’t soft management; it’s the opposite
Accountability done right is actually harder than punishment, because it’s not one conversation. It requires you to show up consistently and ask real questions. To care about why something happened, not just that it happened. And then to help fix it.
The framework for this—starting with a pause before you escalate, considering what’s really going on, then acting with questions instead of accusations—is something I’ve written about before here. It applies to accountability conversations just as much as it does to crisis moments.
Because most accountability problems don’t need punishment. They need clear expectations, follow-up, and a conversation where you’re both trying to solve something instead of one person trying to prove a point.
When managers start treating accountability as prevention instead of punishment—as a conversation that happens throughout the period, not at the very end—employee performance changes. Not because people are afraid, but because people understand what success looks like, and they know their manager is invested in helping them get there.
“I Love Gay People”
I once had a coworker I’m going to call Maggie. And Maggie loved gay people. I know that, because she explicitly told me when she learned I was gay, probably six months into working together.
Up to that point, Mag…
Right now, I have 628 unread emails in my work inbox. That’s in addition to seven unread Signal messages, a few unopened Telegrams, dozens of texts coming in (both personal and professional), and a whole separate Google work suite to contend with for …
In October 1962, with Soviet missiles 80 miles from Florida and his generals demanding airstrikes within days, John F. Kennedy did something his advisors found almost unbearable. He waited. While his advisers urged invasion, Kennedy created what one b…
How financial institutions can turn mandatory reporting of financed emissions into a growth opportunity.
The Citadel founder now owns both surviving private copies of the U.S. Constitution and just wrote a $26 million check in the name of Theodore Roosevelt.
California governor Gavin Newsom just announced a statewide tracker that follows AI-related unemployment claims—and said it’s the first tool of its kind in the country.
Created from a partnership between the governor’s office, the California Employ…
