Management Responsibility and Accountability

Management Responsibility and Accountability

Define Accountability and Responsibility

The positions assumed by workers imply a responsibility to complete particular functions associated with those positions. A number of studies have described the term responsibility, when employed in company affairs, as referring to an area of obligation or perhaps duty designated to an individual because of the dynamics of the individual’s position, function, or perhaps job. Responsibility might therefore be viewed as being a package of commitments associated with employment or operation. Narrowly outlined, role explains employment classification, which, subsequently, includes, although is not necessarily limited to, functionality (Pimpa, 2010).

Accountability is actually a notion with numerous meanings. It is almost always utilized synonymously through the use of these ideas as responsibility, answerability, as well as administration. However what specifically can this idea imply? Within the most literal meaning, the term accountability indicates simply the “ability” or perhaps the “possibility” that a person or something might be “accounted for” or “measured up” (Akerman, 2004).

Being a General Superintendent in the New York as well as the Railroads, McCallum created new concepts when it comes to a contemporary method of management. Inside his 1856 document he developed these specifications (Ken and Hopper, 2007):

A method of procedures to become effective and productive ought to be such as to offer to the chief and dependable leader of the operating division an entire every day record of specifics in all of their details. Without having this kind of oversight the acquiring of a reasonable yearly statement should be viewed as very problematical. The reality that payouts are made devoid of this kind of management doesn’t disprove the position, as oftentimes the astonishingly remunerative nature of the business might guarantee acceptable dividends within the most slack and ineffective administration (Ken and Hopper, 2007).

McCallum introduced these basic concepts for the development of such a competent method of business operations:

Firstly, an effective splitting of duties and responsibilities ought to take place. Thereafter, adequate capacity conferred to allow the responsibilities to always be thoroughly executed, that these kinds of obligations might be genuine within their dynamics. Subsequently, the strategy for recognizing whether or not these kinds of duties are consistently carried out. This kind of details to be acquired by way of a system of and inspections which will not humiliate key officials nor reduce their impact in relation to their employees. Thereafter, the ownership of the system, in general, that will not just allow the superintendent to identify mistakes instantly, but can also explain the mistakes (Ken and Hopper, 2007).

Relationship between Accountability and Responsibility

Accountability and Responsibility are two terms which are frequently mixed up because of the similarity involving their connotations. As it happens, both of these terms need to be comprehended in a different way (Viswesvaran et al., 2005). The term ‘accountability’ is normally utilized in the perception of ‘answerability’. However, the term ‘responsibility’ is utilized within the perception of ‘liability’ or perhaps ‘accountability’. This is actually the fundamental distinction between the 2 terms (Fisscher et al., 2003).

A worker bears accountability for that essential function he or she is assigned to finish. He will become accountable in case he is not going to provide the finished products. He is going to be called as well as questioned as well. Each and every worker of the business bears accountability together with him. However, it is actually the responsibility or even the obligation of every single worker to play a role in the development of the business (Clegg et al., 2007).

In the same manner, it is actually the responsibility of each and every citizen to play a role in the progress of the nation. The responsibility of the parents would be to raise his young ones. The child comes with the responsibility to take care of his elderly parents. The business bears the responsibility to offer amenities to the staff members (Bazerman and Banaji, 2004).

Accountability results in responsibility. An educator is liable for the negative results of his/her pupils in class. He needs to address why his/her pupils acquired such low grades. This type of accountability generates responsibility in the thoughts of the instructor. He views himself as being prone to questioning from the school authorities, if he fails to demonstrate responsibility (Tyler et al., 2008).

Identify how managers may reinforce responsibility and accountability in their interactions with their subordinates.

Actions related to executives reinvigorating responsibility and accountability within their relationships together with their employees consist of clarifying goals, evaluating tasks, coordinating as well as synchronizing work, and managing tasks and also workloads. Setting goals, overall performance supervision proficiency, self-responsibility and accountability relies on the manager’s capability to set up objectives and offer reviews on tasks. Establishment of Goals guarantees group goals are distinct, difficult, and mutually approved. And after that, executives can keep track of individual as well as group conducts to help effective functionality. Checking, assessing, and offering reviews on individual as well as interdependent activities help ensure that groups keep on track, accomplishing overall performance goals effectively and successfully. Planning as well as job co-ordination proficiency relies on the leader’s capability to synchronize and stabilize group interaction. Right after objectives have already been recognized, the manager should make an effort to assure member routines as well as tasks are correctly synchronized. What this means is details, which includes project and role delegations, essential to functionality are addressed, harmonized, and synced. As soon as an understanding of project and role delegations is properly recognized, the manager can go on to stabilize the dispersal of work amongst associates, designate tasks in addition to holding his workforce responsible (Roberts et al., 2003; Rymer, 2008).

Does a definite responsibility and accountability structure lead to better performance in an organization?

Many studies have shown that clear responsibility and accountability structure actually help to improve performance levels in a business (Sarros, 1992). Theoretically, these two factors can be generalized for the process of management and they are also recognized as basic mechanisms of the structure of a business.

Proper Assignment: It is crucial to find out what the correct activity set and purposes in regard to the business’s rules, actions and values are. These actions also must not fall outside the core competency of the labor force. The norm is to transfer assignments, duties and jobs which take up a lot of time and which can be done with the same level of competence to other workers who are capable of producing similar output. The resultant saving in time can be used by the manager in a more effective, industrious and imaginative manner (Shergold, 2005).

Proper Positions: It is the duty of the manager to make sure that the resources at his disposal are adequate enough to allow the labor force to complete the actions allocated to them. If they do not do this, then their performance would be unsatisfactory. It should also be recognized that the correct moment to train people for success in their careers is through assigning them work of a slightly higher level (Shergold, 2005).

Suitable person: The manager should only give first-time and greenhorn workers work whose results are expected and which involves least risk. After establishing trust between manager and employee, which generally happens with workers who are accomplished and who have experience, intricate and more dangerous tasks can then be assigned to them. It is crucial for the success of an organization that a suitable person is given suitable work. The tasks should also be done by a suitable person or in a suitable predicament (Shergold, 2005).

Correct Course/Message: Work should be described in an unambiguous and crisp manner and must involve description of the goal, limits and expectations to the person to whom the work is being assigned. The expectations of management must be communicated clearly. Possible snags and the agenda for completing the task must also be communicated in a clear and unambiguous manner. This will ensure proper work assignment (Shergold, 2005).

Correct administration: Proper checking, assessment, intercession as required, and feedback to be provided to the labor force by management will certainly help to make sure that everything moves according to plan. In regard to managers, precise responsibility and accountability structures will ensure that labor uses its time as well as expertise in the best manner possible. It will also assist in the growth of team members. It will also help them achieve their true worth in the business. Strong responsibility and accountability structures, at the same time, do not the work according to the job description of the worker. For proper allotment of work, it is important that workers are given the charge and power to do work that would otherwise be done by a management person (Shergold, 2005).

Summing Up

After investigating the responsibility and accountability as a behavior, one can state that these expressions actually imply transfer of work from a set of actions, duties and powers applicable to a person’s role, and in certain circumstances, to a person or group, recognized as being equipped to perform that particular work, in situations where management needs assistance with that particular work so that it is able to use its dynamisms on other tasks; the supposition is that such work will be completed properly and according to expectations. Furthermore, it will give management a free hand to choose the manner in which the work is to be performed. Many a study has concluded that clear responsibility and accountability structures lead to improvement in the performance of businesses. Output and competence rises in those businesses which make use of such well-defined lines of responsibility and accountability. At the same time, it is important to understand that the awareness and know-how of the person/group assigning the task is also a vital factor. Lack of proper quality in that person will lead to lower attainment levels.

References

Ackerman, J. (2004). Co-Governance for accountability: Beyond exit and voice, World Development, 32 (3), pp.447-463.

Bazerman, M.H., & Banaji, M.R. (2004). The social psychology of ordinary ethical failures. Social Justice Research, 17(2), 111 — 115.

Clegg, S., Kornberger, M., & Rhodes, C. (2007). Business ethics as practice. British Journal of Management, 17, 1 — 16.

Fisscher, O., Nijhof, A., & Steensma, H. (2003). Dynamics in responsible behavior. In search of mechanisms for coping with responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 44(2 — 3), 209 — 224.

Ken, H., and Hopper, Will. (2007). Dan McCallum Creates the Multidivisional Corporation; in: The Puritan Gift: triumph, collapse and revival of an American dream. IB Tauris Publishers, 2007. p. 66-73

Pimpa, N. (2010). Global marketing for Australian education: Lessons and strategies. Berlin: Lambert Academic Publishing.

Roberts, E. Ashkanasy, N., & Kennedy, J. (2003). The egalitarian leader: A comparison of leadership in Australia and New Zealand. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 20, 517 — 540.

Rymer, C. (2008). Leadership in Australia – how different are we? DBA thesis, Lismore: . Retrieved from http://epubs.scu.edu..cgi?article=1117&context=theses

Sarros, J. (1992). What leaders say they do: An Australian example. Leadership and Organisation Development Journal, 13(5), 21 — 27.

Shergold, P. (2005). Regeneration: New structures, new leaders, new traditions. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 64(2), 3 — 6.

Tyler, T., Dienhart, J., & Thomas, T. (2008). The ethical commitment to compliance: . California Management Review, 50(2), 31 — 51.

Viswesvaran, C., Schmidt, F.L., & Ones, D.S. (2005). Is there a general factor in ratings of job performance? A meta-analytic framework for disentangling substantive and error influences. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 108-131.