Accountability as "Giving an Account"

The Core Idea

The word "accountable" contains its own definition: the ability to give an account - a story - of what you did.

Accountability isn't about outcomes. It's about process goals - routines you control that give you a good likelihood of success.

Process Goals vs Outcome Goals

You can't always control outcomes. You can control your process. The distinction matters most when things go wrong.

When a soldier loses a battle and debriefs with their superior officer, the question isn't "why did you fail?" It's: "What did you actually do?"

Walk me through it. Step by step. What was the procedure? Did you follow it?

The Productive Debrief

If you followed the procedure and still got a bad outcome:

"How can I change my procedure?"
"How can I do things differently?"
"How can a person in my position succeed in the future?"

If you didn't follow the procedure, be open about it. What did you know at the time? What practices did you have? No blame - just an honest accounting.

Why This Matters

This reframes accountability from punishment to learning. The goal is:

Define a process you believe leads to success
Follow it
When outcomes are bad, review the account of what you did
Adjust the process based on what you learn
Repeat

You are accountable for the process, not the outcome. The process is the thing you can actually improve.

Vermont Connecticut Royster - "The Tradition Older" (1952)

The foundational text on military accountability. Written by Vermont Connecticut Royster - Wall Street Journal editor and WWII destroyer escort skipper - after the USS Hobson sank in a collision with the USS Wasp on April 26, 1952, killing 176 sailors. Published May 14, 1952.

"On the sea there is a tradition older even than the traditions of the country itself and wiser in its age than this new custom. It is the tradition that with responsibility goes authority and with them both goes accountability. This accountability is not for the intentions but for the deed."

"The captain of a ship, like the captain of a state, is given honor and privileges and trust beyond other men. But let him set the wrong course, let him touch ground, let him bring disaster to his ship or to his men, and he must answer for what he has done."

"It is cruel this accountability of good and well-intentioned men. But the choice is that or an end to responsibility and finally, as the cruel sea has taught, an end to the confidence and trust in the men who lead, for men will not long trust leaders who feel themselves beyond accountability for what they do. And when men lose confidence and trust in those who lead, order disintegrates into chaos and purposeful ships into floating derelicts."

This editorial became foundational to US Navy doctrine and remains part of the modern Charge of Command - the contract between each commanding officer and the Chief of Naval Operations.

escherize/accountability-process-goals.md

Select an option

No results found