Taking responsibility

[Hugh Spencer]

I have been mystified for quite a time now about this. Here are some examples:- a trained serviceman does not carry out his orders correctly, why should his NCO, officer or colonel take the blame for it?
A linesman on a railway track does not do his job properly, why should his foreman or chairman of the company be blamed?
A professional football team does not win the matches, with all their skills and , I hope, determination to win, why does the manager or coach get sacked?
A nurse does not treat her patients correctly, why do the managers have to take the blame?
There appears to be a tendency to blame management when the offence occurs well away from his immediate surroundings. I don't think some individuals in our society consider they should take on responsibility for their actions.

[clancyblob]

I guess it could be about managers setting up bad situations & systems; failing to check delivery or falsifying results to meet targets; about ignoring advice; about suppressing or ignoring criticism or concerns from below, etc. If a captain puts an idiot at the wheel of the ship, against advice, then goes to bed without arranging supervision/checks on course etc, whose fault is it when they pile onto a rock? I agree that sometimes the media seems a little harsh sometimes. I know I guy works for railtrack. He reckoned management at top wanted to push prices down hard to maximise profits, so made every layer put tasks out to lowest bidder etc, without checking quality. They paid peanuts, got monkeys and the train crashed. There were several responsible parties, but management appear to have most to answer for by setting in train a process that lead to carastrophe. In most cases, incompetence gets challenged, eg the nurse patient example, unless the managers know the ward is over stressed and understaffed, in which case they take the blame. Long live the whistle-blower.

[Hugh Spencer]

Hi clancyblob,
I agree with what you are saying and I agree that there should be arrangements for staff to notify if there is evidence of malpractice. But I have in mind the latest case with the colonel. Your instance of cutting costs to a dangerous level is reprehensible but in this situation, if a linesman's job is to patrol the track for regular maintenance, he should report back to his seniors if there is any indication that matters are not in order. He should record that the report has been made and in that case he should be in the clear.

[wildwood]

A manager is paid a large salary because they are skilled in 'managing' the business, this includes ensuring that the right people are doing the right jobs. The most important factor to a successful business is the one who does the hiring and firing. It is unbelievable how few firms do an annual revaluation of their staff, a very important ingredient in an efficient skilful workforce.

If a worker makes a mistake it is their foreman's fault for not recognising that the worker is not adept enough to fulfil that task. Ultimately it is the General Manager's fault that lower management is inefficient.

Unfortunately, society is now so skewed that corporate executives receive huge salaries and employ advisors to tell them what they are being paid to do.

In the end, the buck stops at the top, hence the financial inducement. No one is forced to occupy the top of the ladder. There are plenty of suitably skilled people who work well below their capabilities cause they've seen the light and prefer a stressfree longer life.

[Hugh Spencer]

Wildwood, you have just reinforced my original remarks. If a workman does not know how to do a job properly it is HIS responsibility to let others know and not make a botch of it, which could produce fatalities. In your argument the workman can please himself how well he does the job without any responsibility to others. Also, it is becoming more and more difficult to fire somebody. The union would call a strike and paralyse a business.

[ludwig]

2 points. Firstly there's a difference between being at fault and being responsible. When the team screws up, it's their fault but it's the manager's responsibility.
Secondly, it works both ways - if the team does well the manager takes the lion's share of the credit, so it's only fair that they take the blame when things go badly.

[Hugh Spencer]

So are you saying the team takes no responsibility for faulty work or a good job done? If I was a member of a team and could not do a good job because of technical difficulties I would be in touch with the foreman or boss so he could change procedures for me to do a good job. And the foreman/boss would congratulate me. Or is this asking too much?

[ludwig]

Don't get me wrong, I know what you're saying - it can be pretty ridiculous when some low level immigration official makes an admin error and there are calls for the home secretary to resign etc.
I'm just putting another side to the argument. You can't have a situation where the boss is not accountable for the actions of his team. I think that would ultimately be worse and lead to more injustice that the situation you're describing.