Corvette, and when he showed the highway patrolman the car’s regis- tration, he discovered that it had been leased on a temporary, monthly basis. That clue might have tipped off Brian that his bosses had made something less than a long-term commitment to his career.
When Brian received his first paycheck it turned out to be somewhat less than the agreed-upon salary. Dave assured Brian that the differ- ence would quickly come in the form of commissions on personal sales, so Brian chose to overlook the discrepancy. After all, he should lead the way in sales, setting an example for his team.
Why hadn’t Brian demanded a written confirmation of his salary and benefits? Friends should trust friends, he had decided. When doing so Brian set aside the memory of a partnership he had formed while in college with a buddy that had soured when the buddy absconded with $3,000 in profits, saying, “Sue me. We don’t have anything in writing.” Unfortunately, Brian elected not to apply that lesson to Sam and Dave.
Brian came to realize that as soon as he had learned that Sam and Dave had sold Sunshine Pool Products he should have sat down, right then, with Morgan to clarify everyone’s expectations and commit- ments. However, because Brian didn’t know Morgan well enough to feel comfortable with him, he decided to let the situation slide, hoping that things would iron themselves out naturally over time.
Did Brian therefore have accountability for what eventually happened to him? In many ways he did. Even though others did take advantage of him and misled him, he learned through objective self- examination that he himself must shoulder some responsibility. After Brian opened up with Andy and pondered Andy’s feedback, he finally came to appreciate both points of view: that of the victim and that of the accountable individual. Finally, Brian was ready to own his circumstances and create a better future. In our experience, however, too few people take this step toward greater accountability.
That’s why in our consulting practice we frequently invoke the cliché that “there’re two sides to every story.” The victim side stresses only one side of the story, the one that suggests you played no role in creating the circumstances. In a difficult situation, it’s easy to feel
“had” or “let down” and to let yourself “off the hook.” But when you
“lock-in” on that single perspective, you “lockout” the other side of the story, which are all the facts that suggest you contributed to cre- ating the circumstances you now face. Victim stories tend to screen out all evidence of accountability.
To establish ownership, then, you must find the heart to tell both sides of the story, linking what you have done or failed to do with your current circumstances. Such a shift in perspective requires that you replace your victim story with an accountable one. However, seeing and owning the accountability side of a story does not mean suppressing or ignoring the victim facts; rather it means acknow- ledging and possessing the reality that you participate in and do not passively observe your circumstances.
The accountable person who owns his or her circumstances can see both the victim and the accountable side of any story, and that usually means admitting that you’ve made some mistakes. Those people who consistently achieve results, people like former Chrysler Chairman Lee Iacocca, quickly acknowledge their mistakes and own the resulting circumstances so they can avoid getting bogged down in the victim cycle and set to work improving things. Here’s what Iacocca told Fortune magazine about one of his mistakes: “I’ve made a lot of them. Let’s say moving the Omni/Horizon cars to one plant and then to another before discontinuing them, at a cost of $100 million, was a mistake. Why argue? We made a $100 million mistake.”
That sort of willingness to own the whole reality and admit mistakes allowed Lee Iacocca to save Chrysler from bankruptcy and make it a viable automobile manufacturer.
On a personal level, consider the story of Home Mortgage Service Scams reported in The Wall Street Journal: “If you get a letter advising you that servicing your mortgage has been taken over by a new company, check it out before you send a check. It may be a scam.
That’s what homeowners in Texas learned recently after receiving a letter announcing that an outfit calling itself Mortgage Bankers of America had ‘acquired ownership of your previous mortgage com- pany.’ The letter asked that future payments and other correspondence
be sent to a post office box in Houston. Although the letter says Mortgage Bankers is the fifth largest mortgage banking company in the United States, law enforcement authorities say it doesn’t exist.”
While Robert Pratte, a St. Paul, Minnesota, attorney who represents mortgage lenders, says the company’s solicitation shouldn’t fool people, it does, everyday. People living Above The Line would invest- igate the situation, those living Below The Line just assume the scam is above board. The former “own” their circumstances, the latter be- come willing victims.
At the University of Southern California Business School, Richard B. Chase, professor of business administration, teaches a class on the management of service operations where he offers students a money- back guarantee of $250 if they aren’t satisfied with his performance by the end of the course. That offer represents a big risk in an aca- demic environment not known for its emphasis on accountability.
Chase wants to impress upon his students, as they study about the superior service practices of companies such as Federal Express and Domino’s Pizza, that customers expect the service they pay for. While some of Chase’s colleagues worry about the implications of his exper- iment, we admire it as an example of assuming accountability. Pro- fessor Chase owns his circumstances, and even though he could end up paying as much as $13,000, if all his students demanded their money back, he’s willing to take the risk. However, just to make sure he doesn’t take an inordinate amount of the responsibility for what his students learn, he requires that they request rebates before they obtain their final grades. If Chase makes mistakes in his class or fails to satisfy his customers, he’s willing to pay for it.
Some health care businesses are also trying to make sure they please their patients. In a Wall Street Journal story entitled, “Pleasing Hos- pital Patients Can Pay Off,” the reporters found a few hospitals owning their circumstances and making it pay off: “As the health-care industry moves into an era of accountability and cost-cutting, the desire to relate patient feedback directly to the bottom line is likely to grow, say hospitals and management service companies.” Take St. Barnabas Medical Center in Livingston, New Jersey, for example: “All patients are asked to evaluate quality of food, cleanliness and staff courtesy, using a questionnaire that provides a measuring stick for a novel contract that links profit to patient satisfaction…. Hospitals that farm out certain hospital services - including St. Barnabas, Faulkner Hos-
pital in Boston and Park Ridge Hospital in Rochester, N.Y.- are in the forefront of what may be a key operating strategy for the 1990s:
Share the risk. Contracts that contain incentives have been around for years, and so have patient surveys. But ‘partnering’ has linked the two formally, and raised the ante higher for vendors, who are some- times expected to invest in state-of-the-art equipment for use in the hospital they have contracted with. A performance-linked contract
‘is a vendor’s gamble,’ concedes Ronald Del Mauro, president and chief executive officer of St. Barnabas. But he adds: ‘If we’re success- ful, they’re successful.’” For St. Barnabas, owning their circumstances and getting their affiliates and suppliers to do likewise result not only in happier patients but in healthier profits.
Unfortunately, millions of people keep themselves from achieving the results and happiness they so desperately pursue because of their unwillingness to see both sides of the story and “own” their circum- stances. According to an Associated Press series of articles entitled,
“Are We Happier?” by Leslie Dreyfous, “The number of books on the topic [happiness] has quadrupled in recent years and the therapy in- dustry has more than tripled in size. Excruciatingly frank talk shows dominate afternoon TV, and entire catalogues are devoted to market- ing meditational tapes and inspirational videos. People pay hundreds of dollars and travel thousands of miles to retreats like Esalen (the granddaddy of human potential centers in Big Sur, California). Still, baby boomers are four times likelier to say they’re not satisfied with their lives than are people of their parents’ generation, according to an Associated Press poll. Experts estimate the incidence of psycholo- gical depression is ten times what it was pre-World War II.” In our increasingly complex and changing world, it seems more and more people think they exert less and less control over their happiness.
Just like Dorothy and her friends in the Wizard of Oz, a lot of people take the trek to the Emerald City, where they assume that a personal audience with the wizard will solve all their problems. All too often, such people blame their lack of happiness on perplexing circumstances that seem totally beyond their control. Rather than own their circum- stances by seeing the whole story, they choose to view themselves as incapable of modifying their situations through their own actions, resigning themselves to being “acted upon” by influences and forces rather than the other way around.
It seems ironic that, in this age of information, millions of people
feel such a lack of control over their lives. Obviously, the communic- ations revolution has done little to overcome, and may have contrib- uted to, a feeling of detachment and disconnectedness with circum- stances and other people. As a result, America has truly come peril- ously close to becoming “a nation of victims,” in which its citizens feel paralyzed rather than empowered by what they observe and learn every day. In such a climate, it’s not terribly surprising that so many people resist ownership of the consequences of their own behavior.
A nation of observers is not a nation of participants. If you sit on the sidelines watching “the game of your life” play out before your eyes, you relinquish your ability to affect the outcome just as much as a spectator watching a football or baseball game from the bleachers.
To remedy this darkening malaise, people must abandon the bleacher seats and take to the playing field. You can take an important step in that direction by embracing the whole story and accepting owner- ship for your circumstances, no matter what the condition or history of those circumstances. Failure to do so invites dire consequences.