I wrote a thread on twitter with regards to how men need to know when to take responsibility and when to refuse it. In a world where people are looking for more rights while forgoing responsibilities, it is very easy to get lost in your self-improvement journey by committing yourself to all kinds of duties in an attempt to demonstrate yourself as a transformed man who can provide value to society. But it is not that simple. There are several factors surrounding responsibility that all need to be broken down and analyzed before someone should uphold its duty.
Responsibility comes with Incentive or Authority
Delegating a responsibility is exploitation if its not accommodated with an incentive or authority. ESPECIALLY when it falls outside your job description. This happens all the time in the workplace with little to no observation. Responsibility in hindsight, should be identified as a trap unless the upside is clearly revealed from the beginning. An incentive is a clear exchange in value: you do something that you are accountable for and get rewarded for your effort. This is the most ideal (uncommon), stress-free scenario. There will always be a push-pull effect, where you will want a generous compensation that will outweigh the effort, while the delegator will seek to outsource maximum responsibility that would justify handing the compensation. But this is normal.
Authority
A more common situation is when authority is given in exchange for delegation of responsibility. Your new found duty will enable you to exert control & make decisions within its domain. This seems like a fair value exchange, but not necessarily. Because if you cant leverage this authority, then whatever you are responsible for, is worthless. There’s a difference between John who has been given the responsibility (and authority) to sort out the mailing room, and Sam, who’s been given the responsibility (and authority) to prioritize meetings to arrange high profile clients to be met first.
John cannot leverage his authority of the mailing room for positional ascendancy. Nor can he use it as an armament for when things go sour. His value is as good as what the mailing room offers – mail. Sam on the other hand can directly affect the bottom line of a business. He can choose to perfect his craft and create a systematic model that optimally streamlines high profile clients to bring in the revenue. Then leverage this feat for positional ascendancy, or insulate himself during layoffs. Or both. So the distinction between Sam and John raises questions.
What are you being responsible for?
What responsibility are you being delegated? You need to be able to quantify what this responsibility yields when its duties are fulfilled. Is it something of value? Apply context to the situation;
- If you’re in a workplace, does this responsibility affect the bottom line of the business? Or is it a mere simple, repetitive job that any junior with baseline intellect can accomplish?
- If your responsibility is to provide as a family man, are you given the respect and authority to take command of your family towards a direction you deem rightful?
You must question the value that’s being exchanged for the responsibility given. We can create a little model here that can clarify the concepts discussed and develop a metric for it to be used as a guide. We know responsibility must be exchanged for either incentive or authority. The third parameter is value; which will determine the weight of the responsibility and subsequently, the ability to leverage authority. For simplicity, we can assume revenue (money) to represent value. The higher the impact the responsibility has on revenue, the stronger the capacity for leverage when you exercise authority. This means, from a positional ascension point of view; that you should only accept responsibility that has an underlying value, which can then be leveraged.
Valueless Responsibility
You should refuse all kinds of responsibility that represents no value. If you can’t because your subordinate position disallows you to, then make a note of it. If you see no value in your newfound responsibility, then understand that without an incentive, no amount of authority will make a valueless responsibility worthwhile. Do not assume that you can apply this model in every context. For example, there are many responsibilities a family man must uphold despite its duties having no apparent value. There’s certain sacrifices a family man should be willing to make to maintain the integrity of his family. And that might mean to uphold responsibilities that doesn’t necessarily provide him value, but provides for the benefit of the family as a whole.
Responsibility without incentive or authority?
I mentioned in the thread that there is only one condition that would merit upholding responsibility despite the absence of incentives or authority; If the responsibility given, is very valuable in of itself, & can be leveraged against the person giving it. This is the cunning method that forces a return in value, and difficult to implement. Because without authority, there’s not much you can do to effectively maneuver leverage. The best way to explain it is through my experience. Refer to the thread HERE.
I was being exploited when I first worked in a community pharmacy, with a
ll the responsibilities dumped on me without any incentive or authority.
Every month, I was being delegated a new responsibility because no one else would do it. But with every new responsibility, I became more and more inseparable from the operations of the business. This is a key ingredient here; becoming INSEPARABLE from the operations of the business.
Going all in
This means understanding the system, the revenue generating services, high paying customers (and networking with them). And breaking rules in order to do favors for them who later become indebted to you. When you’re given a position to do everything, there are methods you can exercise that go unsupervised.
Its the tactic you are forced to take when you are taken advantage of. I immersed myself into the operations of the business. And I decided to act at a time they needed me to be accountable the most. The damage was clear. They either prepare for damage control, or give me what I want; positional ascendancy.
I discourage using this method unless you are being taken advantage of. Abdication of responsibility engrossed within the operations of a business, is a powerful leverage. It can shift anything in your favor when the trigger is pulled at the right time; i.e at a time when conditions necessitate accountability. Diligent use of this method is crucial as it can backfire when not executed at the right time and right place. Observe the situation and context carefully, and don’t be deluded into thinking that you are indispensable. And finally, this method requires patience and concealment from letting others know. You have to lead them to think you are entirely oblivious to what they are doing.
The dark side of responsibility
If you are not careful, all that responsibility can turn into exploitation very quickly. Especially in the absence of any incentive or authority. And that exploitation, once realized can give rise to dark emotions like hate and resentment that will lead you to make rash decisions. I always encourage clients to negotiate their responsibility upfront and explicitly recognize the incentive for their extra duties. There are certain points you need to understand regarding this ‘leveraging of responsibility’, particularly in the absence of any kind of reward.
You must explicitly understand that obtaining valuable responsibility in exchange for nothing OUTSIDE your job description is a risk you are running. Because the leverage could fail. And if it does, its possible that it could backfire and you could lose your job. The risk you will always run with this method is that the boss can absorb the cost and still get rid of you. Some bosses have large enough egos that cloud their judgement entirely. Instead of providing you with a generous well-deserved reward, they rather out-muscle you by simply taking you out.
But its also worth noting that you never want to work for someone who doesn’t reward your value in the first place. There’s a implicit universal law that if you provide more than you should, you ought to get something for it in return. Otherwise the desire to strive to become better will come to a halt. And you should not want to work in a place that does not reward over-achievers, unless you have something going on the side and you are using your 9-5 as a temporary financial aid.
Who you are
It is also worth mentioning that you should really try to understand who you are. You have to get to know yourself very well. You need to know whether you are taking responsibility tactfully for leverage, or whether you are too agreeable and nice. Because if its the latter, then it is more likely that you will lash out of resentment than apply strategic deployment of leverage in order to ascend within the workplace. I have fallen for this trap before in the past.
Not so much that I was agreeable. But my level of industriousness motivated me to take on all the responsibilities of the workplace without accounting for which responsibility had the most impact on revenue.
And so I thought I had leverage, and when I threatened to leave, the owner said “leave”. I experienced this in my junior position which taught me lessons and enabled me to execute it strategically the next time around.
To hedge against this trap, make it a rule that you should never pull the leverage trigger unless you have something set up on the side. You have to consider the worst case scenario: your boss getting rid of you. Which means you need adequate planning for such scenario. You should make this a rule in your life; never make rash decisions on the future of your current job unless you can find something equal or better. Join THE LOBBY where I discuss all these concepts with members and their line of work.
Unmodern Men
