When things go wrong: Some themes of a no-blame culture

Some themes of a no-blame culture include:

• discussion of risk (and responsibilities for them) before problems arise, rather than afterwards
• emphasising collective responsibility and shared business goals
• aiming for insights and understanding about decisions, arrived at through a process of co-operation and collaboration
• acceptance of a joint commitment for taking specific actions, with no-one putting their 'head on the block' (regardless of any individual responsibilities that are assigned)
• using tools (such as the decision tree) to generate and confirm a joint commitment to decisions
• taking risks in an informed way, with full knowledge of the potential consequences
• when problems arise from particualr decisions, remembering and re-stating the reasoning that went into those decisions
• aiming to draw collective learning rather than individual advantage from mistakes, problems and negative situations
• using passive language to defuse tensions and sidestep the assignation of blame (e.g. 'there is a problem' rather than 'so-and-so has made a mistake')
• understanding that creativity, innovation and new directions imply some freedom to make mistakes
• thinking of ways to reward people on the basis of how well they take decisions, not the results of those decisions.

When things go wrong: No blame, as blame is counterproductive and damaging

Blame is counterproductive and damaging for several reasons:

• it has a negative emotional impact on the person concerned, making them more likely to 'self-regulate' their future behaviour in a limiting way
• it closes down the discussions that should result from mistakes
• it shifts the spotlight away from analysis, learning and objectivity
• it discourages other people in the business from taking any kind of risk, whatever the expected value.

If decisions are based on careful, objective consideration of probabilities and impacts, and the potential downside of a risk is accepted because of its positve overall value, then there should be no blame if this downside actually comes about.

Decision tools such as the decision tree create joint commitment to an action, so that no one person's position or reputation is on the line if things go wrong.  In effect, this approach transfers business risks from the individual decision maker, who has much to lose from downsides occurring, to the business as a whole, which can absorb the impacts of downsides ( both financial and reputational).

Good risk management is about being prepared for problems, which in turn helps to avoid a culture of blame.  By valuing control, analysis and objectivity, the focus can be kept on the problems that everyone in the business faces together.

When things go wrong: No blame

Errors arise when individuals make decisions, but their root causes are deeper than how 'competent' we are at the point when we make decisions.  Their sources include :

• the tools available to help us make decisions (such as the decision tree)
• the information we have at our disposal
• our psychological make-up; our values; the way we use information; the frames we deploy; our memories and how we regard past events
• the organisational contex:  corporate values; support systems; the way decisions and their results are analysed and rewarded.

When things go wrong attribution makes us simplify all this hugely, by seeking the causes of negative outcomes in other people.  There is always pressure to demonstrate a response to downsides, and people often find it hard not to blame those who took decisions perceived as having led to them.   Our brains like simple causal stories, not ambiguous complexity, and it doesn't get much simpler than attributing downsides to the actions of someone else.  The implication is that error has arisen because an individual is deficient in character or ability ('look what you've done!).

Because  being blamed gives rise to negative emotions, and often leads to some kind of sanction or punishment as well, people who make errors tend to blame them on circumstances or events, rather than themselves ('it's not my fault!').

Neither of these all-too-familiar 'natural' perspectives on error is useful in improving the way we make decisions, or the way we respond when things go wrong.  Refraining from blame is a crucial part of informed decision making and good management.