Blame, error, and accountability- the keys to building a safer, more resilient culture

In safety-critical environments, the way organizations handle blame, error, and accountability can have profound implications for culture, performance, and outcomes. Yet these terms are often misunderstood or conflated, leading to counterproductive practices. The Human and Organizational Performance (HOP) framework provides valuable insights into these concepts, emphasizing that “errors are normal, blame fixes nothing, and accountability is vital.” This article unpacks these ideas and offers guidance on how organizations can better define and apply them.

The insights shared are drawn from JMJ’s conversations with safety professionals who were asked, “What do you mean by accountability?” and “What is the difference between ‘blame’ and ‘accountability’?”

Error is normal- The foundation of HOP

Human error is inevitable: no system or individual is immune to mistakes. This truth is at the heart of the HOP framework. Recognizing that errors are normal shifts the focus from punishing individuals to understanding the systemic conditions that contribute to errors. As one safety expert noted during a discussion with JMJ, “Do incidents happen because people aren’t set up for success?” Often, the answer is yes. Gaps in training, unclear expectations, or flawed processes frequently play a larger role in incidents than individual negligence.

However, this recognition is often met with resistance. Executives and leaders often equate accepting the inevitability of error with tolerating poor performance. Accepting error as a reality does not mean lowering the standards or abandoning accountability, but it does require us to change the way we respond when things go wrong.

Blame is a counterproductive reaction

Blame is a natural response to mistakes. It often stems from frustration or the need to explain or justify unexpected events. But the moment we declare, “This happened because Joe didn’t follow the procedure,” we stop looking at ways in which the procedure might be improved. Putting Joe on the hook for a mistake takes the rest of us off the hook!

Blame has several detrimental effects, it

• Erodes trust: Employees may fear reporting mistakes, leading to underreporting of near misses and critical issues.
• Deflects responsibility: Leaders may focus on individual failings rather than examining systemic issues.
• Stifles improvement: Blame prioritizes punishment over learning, making it less likely that similar errors will be prevented in the future.

Additionally, blame often reveals a lack of emotional intelligence. Reacting emotionally to errors- rather than investigating the underlying factors- limits an organization’s ability to grow and adapt.

Accountability is the cornerstone of lasting improvement

Accountability, when properly defined and applied, is essential for creating a high-performing organization. Unlike blame, accountability requires clear expectations, thorough investigation, and a commitment to resolution.

According to one safety supervisor, “Accountability gives people the opportunity to make things right. If a person knows better and does something incorrectly, they are accountable. If they didn’t know better, the organization and system are accountable.”

Key characteristics of accountability include:

1. Clear expectations: Employees must understand what is expected of them and have the tools and training to meet those expectations.
2. Investigation and understanding: Accountability requires a deeper look into why an incident occurred and who or what is truly responsible.
3. Opportunity for growth: Accountability should aim to improve systems, processes, and individual performance, rather than punish.

This approach ensures that standards are upheld without fostering a culture of fear or disengagement.

Blame vs. accountability

A common pushback from leaders is that the principle “blame fixes nothing” sounds like giving employees a free pass. This concern is understandable but rooted in a misunderstanding.

Consider the example of a worker operating at heights without being tied off. Does the principle of “blame fixes nothing” mean that the worker faces no consequences? Not at all. The principle instead asks whether the worker was:

• Properly trained on safety procedures
• Provided with functioning equipment
• Aware of the expectations and risks

If the answer to these questions is yes, holding the worker accountable is appropriate. If not, the accountability may lie with the organization for failing to set the worker up for success. This nuanced approach ensures that accountability is fair and constructive.

Is there ever a place for blame in HOP?

In Human and Organizational Performance approaches, blame is generally seen as counterproductive. However, there may be rare exceptions. For example, deliberate violations of safety protocols or malicious behavior may warrant a response that feels closer to blame. Even then, the focus should remain on accountability—identifying why the behavior occurred and how it can be prevented in the future.

Establishing a culture of accountability

Building a culture that prioritizes accountability over blame often requires a significant shift in mindset and practice. The first step is to conduct a comprehensive assessment of the current culture. This ensures alignment across all levels, locations, and teams, identifying gaps where expectations, tools, or training may be lacking.

Here are additional strategies to implement and sustain this cultural shift:

1. Engage leadership: Leaders must model the behaviors they wish to see, demonstrating accountability in their actions and decision-making.
2. Provide education and training: Equip employees with the knowledge and tools to understand the principles of HOP and the difference between blame and accountability.
3. Foster open communication: Encourage a culture where employees feel safe reporting errors and near misses without fear of reprisal.
4. Implement systemic solutions: Focus on addressing systemic issues uncovered during investigations, ensuring that individuals are set up for success.
5. Reinforce through recognition: Celebrate instances where accountability leads to meaningful improvements, reinforcing the value of this approach.
6. Monitor and adjust: Continuously evaluate the effectiveness of these efforts, making adjustments as needed to sustain progress.

Shifting to a culture of accountability takes time and commitment but yields significant rewards. By embracing the principles of HOP and rejecting the counterproductive nature of blame, organizations can create safer, more resilient workplaces where both individuals and systems thrive.