The original context for responsibility was in politics. John Stuart Mill and Max Weber, two able philosophers, both recognized the importance of responsibility in representative democracies. Both stressed attention to people, situations, and consequences. What they really emphasized was responsiveness to and by the people as is supposed to happen in a democracy.
Liability today is usually the focus in what used to be called the personnel or human resources department. Emphasis is on “risk management”. Instead of resources or personnel, employees are risks to be managed and minimized. Instead of customers or clients, the people who use products or services are potential lawsuits that have to be avoided or finessed. We have created “limited liability” partnerships and corporations to protect ourselves from each other.
According to many economists, the United States has moved to a service economy from what used to be a mixed industrial/service economy. The irony, the contradiction, in that so-called move is that “service sucks.” Complaints about the quality of service and the durability of products in businesses dominate the small talk around the water coolers and the coffee shops.
Since the advent of risk management, have we moved from service to dire predictions that often come true. How much can you really “manage” risk without creating the environment for that risk. To answer those questions, consider that risk management is considered “preemptive.” In other words, you anticipate what could happen, then have a plan. A further step in corporate management is “business continuity planning”.
Business continuity planning (BCP) goes that extra mile – it assumes that whatever awful could happen, eventually will happen. The necessity to have BCP in place arises because even very unlikely events will occur if given enough time. Good grief! No wonder we have such trouble getting along with each other.
When we continue on the basic idea of BCP, we are programming the future. We end up accomplishing a dire future. Studies show that when you treat others in a particular way you will get what you expect. In behavioral terms, the equation is: description equals prescription. If you keep describing a person in a particular way, you are also telling that person how to act. Add it all up. What we keep doing is anticipating risk and getting catastrophe.
I know, I know. This view isn’t pragmatic; it is not sensible; it’s Utopian. I believe that the folks who spend so much time anticipating disaster or who are grousing about how responsibility and service are secondary to risk management live in a Dootopia. They believe that things will get excrementally worse. In other words, they practice self fulfilling prophecy.
Competence assumes each of us will -- with proper training, experience, and empathy while working cooperatively with mutual respect – do the right thing and do it well. If you fear, disrespect others, worry excessively, your energies are channeled into internal processes that detract from paying attention to the external obvious – every situation has 3 parts: you, other people, and the context. You are able to take care of and educate yourself in order to be the best you can. You don’t get to be in charge of the other two. You can understand, cooperate, and know that you are competent to deal with life in concert with your allies, friends, and family. People often get what they have planned for and anticipated. Plan to be responsible and responsive. Anticipate success.