American processes are linked to individual accountability through assigned ownership. Process steps have designated responsible parties. When processes fail, investigation identifies who bears responsibility.
The assumption is that clear accountability improves performance: when people know outcomes will be attributed to them personally, they invest more effort. This means processes typically assign explicit responsibility. Metrics track performance against defined standards.
When things go wrong, expect analysis of where breakdowns occurred and who was responsible. Diffuse responsibility—everyone and therefore no one accountable—is avoided because it undermines both performance and learning. This accountability orientation means process documentation often specifies ownership, and process improvement often focuses on clarifying accountability where it has become unclear.
Comments