We all recognize the feeling. A concern arises - like missing a deadline, sending a blunt email, or being late to a meeting. Our tendency is often to avoid the discomfort of speaking up, hoping the problem will resolve itself. The harsh truth is that any problem we ignore today could turn into a conflict we must face tomorrow. The effort, skill, and difficulty involved in having an honest, tough conversation become much greater when we wait until the issue is large and emotionally charged. That’s why having a clear, step-by-step plan for accountability is a valuable tool to keep in your leadership toolkit.
How the Accountability Dial Helps
The Accountability Dial, created by Jonathan Raymond [1], offers a five-step process for addressing problems before they escalate. Rather than jumping to reprimands or formal measures, a leader begins with light feedback and intensifies only if the issue continues. The dial can mostly be paired with Nonviolent Communication: each step, until the boundary, starts with observation, then examines needs, and finally encourages dialogue around requests.
Let’s explore how each Accountability Dial step works in practice.
Figure 1. The Accountability Dial
Step 1: The Mention
This is the lightest touch, an immediate, non-judgmental acknowledgment of a recent observation. It highlights a behavior that isn’t a problem right now, but could become one if it continues [1]. The goal here is straightforward: address the behavior while it’s small, uncharged and easy to fix. In NVC terms, the mention is a clean observation followed by a gentle request. A good time to bring up a mention is right after an event has happened. You might ask someone if they have a moment immediately following a meeting.
For example: “Hey Mark, I noticed you were late to the stand-up today. Everything OK?”
Step 2: The Invitation
If the behavior continues after the mention, the next notch on the dial is the invitation. At this stage, it seems that the behavior may have become a pattern, supported by two or three instances. During the invitation, the goal is to support the other person to explore this pattern. In NVC terms, you might identify the underlying needs driving a person’s strategies, and as a result, they might find more effective ways to fulfill their own needs and the needs of others involved.
Building on our previous example, it might be something like: “Hi Mark, we recently spoke about being late to the stand-up. Over the past week, you’ve been late to three of our stand-ups. I feel uneasy about it because I value respecting each other’s time and having efficient meetings within the team. Could you help me understand what’s going on?”
Step 3: The Conversation
Most of the time, the mention and the invitation are enough to find a way forward that works for both parties. However, when an invitation fails to bring about a (lasting) change, it’s necessary to engage in a more in-depth conversation. At this stage, there is an urgent yet empathetic tone, clearly emphasizing how the behavior is increasingly impacting the team or shared goals. The aim is to uncover the underlying issue(s) and identify meaningful actions that can be evaluated and followed up over time.
The beginning of that conversation could go something like this, given a new situation:
You:
“Thanks for making some time for me, John. I wanted to circle back to our conversation from a couple of weeks ago about the impact of your e-mail communication. I appreciate that you were open to discussing it. A couple of e-mails sent to our partners this week have me feeling concerned. It’s important to me that our partners feel fully supported and respected in their interactions with us, and I’m worried the directness of your tone is not landing that way. I was hoping you could help me understand your perspective better. When you’re composing those messages, what’s the main goal you’re trying to accomplish? I’d like to hear your thoughts so we can figure out a path forward together.”
John:
“Honestly, I’m just trying to be efficient. When I send a short email, it’s because I need a quick response. I don’t have time for the pleasantries and the long context setting that everyone else seems to require. I’m focused on getting the task done, not writing essays.”
You:
“I appreciate the focus on efficiency. And, this is the core of the dilemma: the feedback I received yesterday from our engineering partner shows that the current method is damaging the relationship. Their team lead told me they have requested a new point of contact due to frustration. So, the problem for us to solve is this: How do we achieve the speed and efficiency you’re aiming for, while ensuring our communication builds our partnerships rather than hurting them?”
Step 4: The Boundary
The boundary is reached when follow-up conversations haven’t resulted in meaningful change. This is a turning point. Either a breakthrough happens soon, or the person will be unable to continue in their current job or role. From a needs-based perspective, one could argue that the manager’s or organization’s needs haven’t been met to a degree that there is now a requirement for immediate and noticeable change. A demand is now being made to safeguard the organization’s needs or values.
In our case with John, the essence of the message could be something like:
“John, thank you for meeting. We’ve discussed how the tone of your emails affects our partners, but I still see similar issues. I need to see immediate and ongoing improvement to work together respectfully and supportively. For the next two weeks, please send all external emails to me for review before sending them to a partner. This is a temporary step to help you meet our expectations around communication. My goal is to help you regain your independence in your work as soon as possible. This is necessary for you to continue in your role on this team. Can you commit to this process?”
Step 5: The Limit
Reaching the Limit is rare because it is only reached after all previous attempts - the Mention, the Invitation, the Conversation, and the Boundary - have failed to bring about the necessary change. At this point, it becomes evident that the individual’s needs and the organization’s needs are not aligning, despite everyone’s efforts, which will likely lead to the termination of that person’s employment with the organization.
By moving through the Accountability Dial, we match the intensity of our feedback to the situation. This approach allows us to address minor issues with empathy and curiosity, saving serious actions for when they are truly necessary and ensuring that dialogue has been thoroughly exhausted.
Invitation to Practice
What Mention could you make this week that highlights a behavior that isn’t a problem now, but could become one if left unaddressed? State your factual observation and make an open, curious request: Example: “I noticed you were looking at your phone a couple of times during the meeting. Everything OK?” By addressing it immediately and simply, you keep the door to dialogue wide open.
About Me & My Work
My name is James De Mulder, and I’m dedicated to helping teams and leaders transform conflict into connection through dialogue. The insights in this newsletter are the starting point. My work with organizations focuses on turning these principles into a shared practice through feedback training workshops. Interested? Simply send me a DM for a no-obligation chat, or find the training brochure here.
Call to Connection
Did this resonate with you? I’d love to hear your experience.
Sources
[1] Raymond, J. (2016). Good Authority. IdeaPress Publishing.