Accountability in Business: Performance, Compensation, and Autonomy

This report delves into the multifaceted concept of accountability within a business context. It begins by defining accountability as the obligation of an individual or organization for its actions, particularly concerning financial and entrusted responsibilities. The report then explores various aspects of corporate performance that businesses should be accountable for, including staffing decisions, performance evaluations, and compensation structures. It highlights the importance of formal accountability in staffing, the impact of fair performance evaluations on employee satisfaction, and the role of compensation in motivating employees. Furthermore, the report examines the role of management autonomy in fostering performance-based accountability and improving HRM systems. The analysis draws upon various research studies and theoretical frameworks to provide a comprehensive understanding of how accountability influences organizational effectiveness, employee behavior, and overall success.

ACCOUNTABILITY

(a) What does ‘accountability’ mean?
Accountability is considered to be the liability or an obligation of an individual for handling the
different activities, in an organization. It includes the major responsibilities related to handling
the money and then entrusted property as well. Accountability is about ensuring that there is a
proper response to the RFP (Request for Proposals) to meet the different requirements. Hence,
the employees are generally held responsible for completion of the tasks. The corporate
accountability involves the different answers to the organization where the different actions and
the results are taken into consideration (Kaufamn et al., 2017). The performance and
accountability reporting (PAR) helps the organization to properly compile the documents and
then quantify the profitability, efficiency and the adherence mainly to budgeting. The corporate
accountability implies that the organization needs to be responsible and answerable to the
different deviations, depending upon the goals and the values. They are documented under the
missionary and visionary statements.
(b) What aspects of corporate performance do you believe that a business organization
should be accountable for?
As per the research, there are different ways for improvement in the accountability standards for
the public organisation. It can be done through the increased performance and then working over
the context-specific tasks. The examples are the duties in the non-profit organizations or the
performance appraisal accuracy. It directly improves the organizational effectively with
rationalized budgetary decisions (Christensen, and Lægreid, 2015). As per the theoretical
framework, there are formulations based on how the scholars have introduced concepts of

capacity and wiliness that are broader than ability and motivation. The study assumes the
performance of function under:
CorporatePerformance=f ( capacity∗willingness )
The study examines the different aspects about how the employees are affected and held directly
responsible for the changes in the performance of organisation. It is important to understand the
different measures which are perceived through the different measures like the evaluation of
performance and handling the compensations system. The accountability involvements the
mechanism for properly managing and then setting mutual obligations between the different
accountability forums and actors (John Bernardin, Thomason, Ronald Buckley, and Kane, 2016).
Some of the aspects highlighted are:
a. Accountability defined for the organizational staffing
The decisions made by the managers in the organisation needs to be justified about whom they
recruit and to whom they give promotion. Here, the HRM consists of different aspects related to
the qualifications and the evaluation to hire the decisions. The selection process is important for
the composition where the organizational human resources are subjected directly to the different
formal methods. They are mainly for the enhancement of effectiveness and planning about the
decisions which needs to be made. It is seen that without any formal accountability, there will be
a problem in staffing as it will be more personalized. The inappropriate process implies that there
is a major lack of the formal accountability. Hence, the federal employees need to show some
positive behavior with knowledge sharing (Costa & Pesci, 2016).

(Han & Hong, 2019)
b. Accountability with evaluation of the performance
Considering the accountability impact on the organization, there are social structures that are set
by recognizing the individuals as the agent of their action. The mutual obligation is mainly in
between the organization and employees to perform well and accomplish the goals. The
performance evaluation is based on the control which allow the raters to reevaluate the
employees in a formal manner. It is seen that the accountability decreases with unfair evaluation
and so it is important for the employee’s perception. The federal employees have been showing
positive response like the satisfaction in job, with performance evaluation that is fair, and the
feedback is also given meaningful approach (Dougherty et al., 2016).
c. Accountability for the compensation
Considering the compensation as the major key, the employment of people is considered to be
essential. The performance can help in determining the difference in compensation where the

employees generally focus on bringing a better salary for the different duties and the
responsibilities. The system is suited wherein the rewards and punishments follow the conduct of
the agents. The expectancy theory of motivation helps the individuals to be motivated by rewards
for their performance. The equity theory helps the individual to feel motivated when they receive
the rewards for their work. The pay based on the performance has been helpful to work in the
private companies (Schillemans, 2016). The research is based on the performance through which
the payments are analysed and it helps to motivate the employees as well. There are different
standards like the seniority and the duties which are considered important for the compensation
management and they directly motivate the employees to work more for a better salary.
d. Role of Autonomy in Accountability
The management autonomy has been mainly focusing on the advent of characterizing the
performance-based accountability. It involves the measures to ensure that there are different
standards based on the professionalism and the sense of duty. Here, the different perspectives are
defined through completely handling the empowerment of the public employees who have been
working on the different actions.
The management autonomy makes the accountability effective with government pursuing the
managerial reforms towards the employee empowerment to adopt performance-based
accountability initiatives. The higher autonomy brings positive effects and improve HRM
systems as well. Here, the management of autonomy moderates the association between
accountability in staff and compensation functions (Ljungholm,, 2015). The findings are based
on supporting the different arguments which can help in improving the public sector. The
accountable organizations are considered to be the unique creatures who tend to stand out from
the others mainly because of their better performance, and a greater loyalty of employees with

higher customer satisfaction (Kaufman et al., 2017). The rewards are great, but the organization
do not generally seem to embark on the journey of accountability as they find it difficult to
achieve the higher levels. The accountability is considered to be the implicit and the explicit
expectations where one might be able to justify the beliefs and the feelings or actions to the
others. It is considered to be the important reward and punishment that is contingent upon the
evaluations. Hence, the agencies need to establish different instruments to respond to the legal
entities and then focus on the perspectives that concern about the pre- and the post-factor
varieties.

References
Christensen, T. and Lægreid, P., 2015. Performance and accountability—A theoretical discussion
and an empirical assessment. Public Organization Review, 15(2), pp.207-225.
Costa, E. and Pesci, C., 2016. Social impact measurement: why do stakeholders
matter?. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 7(1), pp.99-124.
Dougherty, K.J., Jones, S.M., Lahr, H., Natow, R.S., Pheatt, L. and Reddy, V., 2016. Looking
inside the black box of performance funding for higher education: Policy instruments,
organizational obstacles, and intended and unintended impacts. RSF: The Russell Sage
Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences, 2(1), pp.147-173.
Han, Y. and Hong, S., 2019. The impact of accountability on organizational performance in the
US federal government: The moderating role of autonomy. Review of Public Personnel
Administration, 39(1), pp.3-23.
John Bernardin, H., Thomason, S., Ronald Buckley, M. and Kane, J.S., 2016. Rater rating‐level
bias and accuracy in performance appraisals: The impact of rater personality, performance
management competence, and rater accountability. Human Resource Management, 55(2),
pp.321-340.
Kaufman, B.G., Spivack, B.S., Stearns, S.C., Song, P.H. and O’Brien, E.C., 2017. Impact of
accountable care organizations on utilization, care, and outcomes: a systematic review. Medical
Care Research and Review, p.1077558717745916.
Ljungholm, D.P., 2015. The impact of transparency in enhancing public sector
performance. Contemporary Readings in Law and Social Justice, 7(1), pp.172-178.

Schillemans, T., 2016. Calibrating Public Sector Accountability: Translating experimental
findings to public sector accountability. Public Management Review, 18(9), pp.1400-1420.