Setting Clear Expectations For Autonomous Work

When times are tough, leaders start talking (a lot) about accountability, but here’s the thing: most of them don’t actually define what they mean. Teams are left guessing—or worse, wasting energy signaling contribution instead of making an impact. That’s not accountability. That’s theater. I think of accountability as a three-legged stool. If one leg is missing, it topples. If it’s standing but wobbly? You’ve got a weak leg to reinforce. 1️⃣ Expectation – Spell it out. What exactly does accountability look like? How will you know it’s happening? What would you see if you were watching Accountability on a movie screen? Without clarity, you get performative effort—which might look helpful but doesn’t move the needle. 2️⃣ Support – Acting like an owner is a great mindset, but it doesn't matter much when significant skill gaps exist. Once the expectation is crystal clear, ask folks: What would you need to meet this expectation? If people care but can’t execute, that’s on you. 3️⃣ Authority – People can’t own what they aren’t empowered to do. If they know what’s expected and have the skills to deliver but feel they need permission to move? Expect stagnation. Make authority as clear as expectation. This isn’t easy, but it's the most important thing any leader can do to unlock speed and performance. Most companies don’t have a talent problem—they're just missing a leg of the stool. What’s worked (or toppled over) for you?

The "If, Then" leadership style has come back in remote and hybrid work decisions. Here's why it doesn't work and what people leaders can do to get it right. It is that old formula: If you prove you’re more productive, then you get flexibility. The problem? This isn’t leadership. It’s a warranty policy, and it’s got cracks. If you treat people like adults, then they will treat your mission like theirs. If you lead with trust, then the future of work is yours to own. We’ve seen this play out before, even pre-pandemic. There were two flavors of this with different outcomes. The learnings give us insights for success. _______________ Flavor 1. Large established companies flavor. It wasn't clear who got approved for remote work and why. Those who were lucky to get it often became second-class citizens. They faced a persistent need to justify their worth. They had to step up more than their colleagues who were in the office. They were often passed over for promotions and key roles. This was a failure of leadership. It did not build high-performing teams with a strong culture. They lost top talent. _______________ Flavor 2. Startups that were nimble and forward-thinking. They asked, "What if we make remote work the foundation of our growth? We could fund ourselves for longer. If we set clear expectations, accountability, and support for distributed teams, we can make it work. We won't be tied to one location or locked in talent wars in overcrowded cities. And guess what? They thrived. _______________ Here’s the so what for people leaders today: The if-then warranty policy isn’t going to cut it. Three steps to get it right: 1️⃣ Set clear, shared goals with your team. These need to be outcomes for the team to achieve. 2️⃣ Empower your team to set flexible work norms. They should suit both individuals and the team. They should help deliver the desired outcomes. Good people make things work for their teammates. This helps build psychological safety as well. 3️⃣ Be transparent about accountability. Provide real-time feedback if things go off course. Adjust as needed. We can't take flexibility and results for granted. What you will achieve: Your team will not just meet expectations—they will out perform.

Transition into a performance-oriented enablement function with the 3 O’s: Outcomes Outputs Obstacles — OUTCOMES: These are the most important. If you skip this or don’t make it the priority, you’ll end up creating work for works sake. Start with the highest level mission of the role (once they hit this, there is nothing more you can ask of them). Then deconstruct that into dependencies (in order for that to happen, *this* needs to happen). The goal is to reach the upstream outcomes that the rep and enablement can have direct control over. Examples: - conversion rates - average deal size - pipeline coverage - deal cycle length - email/meeting velocity - executive engagement - qualification score - total engagement among ICP & IBP - meeting-to-opportunity conversion - campaign-to-meeting conversion - email replies & rate - call connects & rate - etc — OUTPUTS: Based upon the Outcomes, what Outputs need to be produced/delivered on the job and to what standard? Outputs are tangible nouns, produced to accomplish something specific (those upstream outcomes). They are the valuable effects of behavior - documents, decisions, relationships. The value of the output depends on how anchored it is to an outcome. If you struggle defining what is accomplished upon producing the output, it’s probably not very useful. The standards you set for each output (what good looks like) should be specifically selected to ensure it’s associates desired outcomes happens. Examples: - territory plan - account plan - contact list - new conversation - new meeting - qualification criteria - champion - mutual action plan - current state analysis - future state assessment - proof of concept - proposal - etc — OBSTACLES: For each Output, remove or address the Obstacles that make prevent everyone from performing (and accomplishing desired outcomes) to standard. When troubleshooting Obstacles, follow this sequence to prioritize the most likely barriers: - clear expectations and accountability - frequent feedback that guides/confirms - accessible information and data - resources and assistance that guides - process and tools that enhance performance - ample time and opportunity - worthwhile incentives and consequences - motivation to achieve standards - capacity to learn and perform - necessary knowledge and skills to perform — This is about simplifying: to standardize and align on what we mean by “performance” and then removing obstacles to continuously improve that performance. Avoid programs and other one off enablement activities/initatives. By definition, those end and add complexity into your performance system. Continuous improvement, on the other hand, never ends and is meant to remove complexity.