Telling the truth about accountability

All of our systems are built on the presupposition that people will avoid accountability if given an option.

How did that happen?

Being accountable means doing two things as a member of a group or community:
1) observing performance against specific, measurable criteria
2) telling a story (giving an account) of how specific behaviours contribute to specific results.

Here's what we know about human beings:

1) normally functioning human neurology has multiple, sophisticated capabilities that exist only to observe other human beings in relation to ourselves. We observe minute changes in the state and behaviour of the people around us and track how those changes relate to changes in our own neurology, physiology or behaviour. We do this automatically and continuously.

2) human beings are the creatures who tell stories. We tell stories naturally, easily and often. We get huge benefits from telling our own stories. We enjoy telling stories.

If we stop making the observations that allow us to be accountable, we stop functioning as normal human beings. We lose track of the information we need in order to make decisions or take action.

So what does it take to stop people from being accountable? It's a huge amount of work to overcome automatic functions that are part of how we think and respond naturally. We have to really want something - or really want to avoid punishment - if we are to overcome what we do naturally. Think about breaking any habit - it takes will power, exerted continuously over a period of time.

We have to be really motivated to break the accountability habit.

Someone has to be offering us huge rewards for not noticing or keeping silent. Or someone has to be punishing us harshly for noticing or speaking up.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

"Yes" sets for building agreement and manipulation

I recently watched a video of a solution-focus therapist working with a client. The clip began with a number of questions and statements with which the client would agree.  In hypnosis and sales, it's known as a "yes set." If you're not familiar with the concept, it works roughly like Simon Says.  In that game, you get into a pattern of doing what "Simon says" so that you eventually do what the leader says even when s/he does not insert the magic words "Simon says." In the "yes set," you get used to saying yes until such a strong pattern of agreement exists that you agree with statements or instructions you might not otherwise give your agreement. The more times in a row you have said "yes," the greater the probability that you will say "yes" to the next statement. Yes sets can be seen in two ways. The first is that you are offering someone evidence that you are observing and accepting their experience. When every
Read more

The hypnotic contract

Under what conditions would you allow someone else to tell you what to think?   If you have watched a stage hypnotist, you have seen what looks like one person exercising remarkable control over the thoughts and actions of another. It is fascinating, in part, because we have all seen it happen in real life. Suddenly someone we know seems to be relying on someone else to do the thinking.  Even if the influence is good, it is a little frightening. The secret is that there are no magic words.  In order to lead someone into hypnosis, that person has to be willing to go there. Often the people you see on stage are more than willing. For whatever reasons, they are enthusiastic about giving up self control and allowing someone else to take charge. They know that there are limits to what can happen on stage and they are only agreeing to give up control within those limits. What you see in hypnosis is an agreement between two people. Like all agreements between human beings, it stretches as far
Read more

The fine line between observations, suggestions and commands

I have been watching Tony Robbins this week in the documentary called " I Am Not Your Guru ." You can read a nicely ambivalent review in the Financial Times here.   I think the ambivalence is built into the process, which might be surprising given the loud celebration that characterizes the Date with Destiny in the film. For those of us whose work has evolved from NLP, there are lessons to be learned from modelling the most famous and successful practitioner of NLP (Robbins has far surpassed all the founders by all measures of success). Because he does so much so well, Robbins lets us see how fine the line is between observing and suggesting. Let me explain. Robbins frames his "interventions" both with the exercises and performances we do not see in the film and with his invitations. The film opens with an intervention with a young man who says he is suicidal; it is only later that we see Robbins say he is looking for someone who is suicidal to work with. Since
Read more