Recently I challenged a post by Sally, whose work I admire. She wrote: “Leadership will make or break your culture. On this there is no middle ground.” I asked a simple question: If culture fails, must we blame the leaders? More importantly, does assigning blame actually fix anything? The familiar response from most management consultants to a failing culture is more leadership and team training, better role modelling, clearer expectations and stronger managerial accountability. These may help. But they keep returning us to the same assumption: better leaders are the answer.
Objections Before Complaints: Get It Wrong and Maybe We’re Screwed
We encourage people to speak up at work. But what happens when the person they're speaking to responds unfairly? Imagine you raise a concern about a faulty screw during a team meeting. Your manager dismisses you rudely or simply ignores your concerns. The screw may or may not be faulty. That's one issue. Your manager's behaviour is another. So, you complain anonymously about her to HR. But consider what happens next.
It’s the Review Process, Stupid!
Organizations need to hear this, in my opinion; No more being mister nice guy. It is time for the team and manager to be held to account for any misbehavior. But what fundamentally makes a behavioural accountability system work? Is it the rules? The leadership? The consequences? I think the answer lies in something often overlooked: the review process. SpatzAI is built around a simple principle: Accountability Before Authority.
The Real Cost of Accountability — And Where to Buy It
Accountability is often treated as something heavy. An issue involving objectionable behaviour arises. A manager steps in. Someone is called to account. There may be a reprimand, a formal conversation, an investigation or, eventually, an HR grievance. But accountability does not have to start there. Sometimes we use a costly sledgehammer to crack a nut when a simple nutcracker would do. At its smallest, accountability can be almost costless. Sue: “Caution! That came across as rude.” Jim: “Fair point.” Done.....
Accountability Before Authority: A Possible Framework for Human and Artificial Intelligence
“Am I my brother’s keeper?” — Genesis 4:9. What if the answer is yes? And what if my brother is also my keeper? Now extend that principle beyond humanity to artificial intelligence. As AI becomes increasingly intelligent and autonomous, we face a question explored by philosopher Nick Bostrom: How do we ensure that intelligence greater than our own remains accountable? Perhaps part of the answer lies not in greater intelligence, but in a common real-time behavioural operating system. Accountability Before Authority. This is the foundational principle behind SpatzAI, a pre-grievance self-management behavioural system originally designed for workplace teams:
A Standard Solution to a Classic Problem
If a workplace problem is so common that we call it a "classic..", why haven't we developed a standard solution? I recently exchanged comments with Erika on LinkedIn about psychological safety, accountability and the everyday messiness of workplace relationships. Erika argued that psychological safety shouldn't mean avoiding difficult conversations. She emphasised the importance of trust, maturity and people learning to talk directly with one another rather than about one another. I largely agree.
Designed Personality vs Designed System
I think there are two very different ways to approach workplace culture. The first is the familiar leadership-modelling solution. Leaders are expected to model respectful behaviour, set the tone, reinforce values, correct poor behaviour, resolve disputes and somehow embody the culture everyone else is expected to follow. At its best, this can work remarkably well. A strong leader can create a strong culture.
The Empress’s New Safety
Psychological safety has become one of the workplace’s most fashionable promises, with all sorts of management consultants making these unfounded promoises. We are told that psychologically safe teams speak up more, learn faster, innovate better and make fewer mistakes. I have little argument with the destination. My problem is with the vehicle. Ironically when one speaks up and asks where is the test data from the operating system? Cue the crickets.
Spatz™: Culture By Default
I think culture is governed by how team members respond when minor behavioural issues emerge. Every team member, on occasion, will lose their cool, interrupt, dismiss an idea, talk down to someone, be overly dogmatic, use sarcasm or simply get their tone wrong. That does not suddenly make them a disrespectful person ie. full of disrespect. It means their level of disrespect has increased momentarily.
The “Gift” of Feedback
We often hear that feedback is a gift. I think that idea can become dangerous when it quietly turns into: “If someone gives you feedback, you should accept it, however they choose to deliver it.” That is where I think psychological safety can begin to unravel. Feedback contains at least two separate things: Content — what the person is actually saying Delivery — how they choose to say it.
