The Responsibility Trap
I recently worked with a thoughtful, experienced Agile IT leader who emphasized something that stuck with me:
Responsibility without authority equals liability.
This resonated deeply because it’s something I’ve seen time and again in organizations large and small. In my experience, I have found that accountability is a key part of the equation too. It’s all part of a bigger issue in which we often confuse responsibility, authority, and accountability.
Let’s break it down:
- Responsibility is the duty to do the work or meet an objective.
- Authority is the power to make decisions and take action.
- Accountability is being answerable for the outcome, good or bad.
Problems arise when those things don’t align. To better understand how these roles interact, here’s a breakdown of their intersections, and the problems that arise when one is missing.
Responsibility and Accountability Without Authority Leads to Liability
This is the core of the responsibility trap. This is where someone is expected to deliver and answer for results, but can’t make necessary decisions.
Example:
- A team lead tasked with delivery but can’t reject new work or change resourcing.
- A Project Manager is accountable for deadlines but can’t influence team staffing.
Risk:
- Burnout.
- Blame without control.
- Erosion of trust.
When people are expected to deliver results and be held accountable, but lack the authority to make critical decisions, they’re being set up to fail. This mismatch creates frustration, fuels burnout, and breaks trust. To build resilient, high-performing teams, responsibility and accountability must be matched with real decision-making power.
Responsibility and Authority Without Accountability Leads to Unaccountable Action
This is where someone can do the work and make decisions, but is not answerable for the outcome.
Example:
- A contractor or vendor who builds and ships features but doesn’t own the outcome.
- A middle manager empowered to act but not held responsible when things go wrong.
Risk:
- Lack of ownership.
- Decisions made without concern for long-term impact.
- Finger-pointing when outcomes go sideways.
When individuals have the power to act and the responsibility to execute, but aren’t held accountable for the results, it creates a dangerous gap. Without accountability, decisions may be short-sighted, ownership weakens, and outcomes suffer. Sustainable success requires tying authority and responsibility to clear, shared accountability.
Authority and Accountability Without Responsibility Leads to Detached Oversight
This is someone who has power and is held accountable, but isn’t doing the actual work or doesn’t have operational responsibility.
Example:
- An executive who signs off on a plan and is accountable for results, but isn’t close to execution.
- A product owner who can prioritize and is held responsible for value delivery, but isn’t involved in the sprint day-to-day.
Risk:
- Misalignment between goals and execution.
- Unrealistic expectations.
- Micromanagement or blame when delivery fails.
When authority and accountability exist without direct responsibility, oversight becomes disconnected from reality. This detachment can lead to misaligned goals, unrealistic demands, and a tendency to micromanage or assign blame. Bridging this gap requires tighter collaboration and clearer visibility into the work being done.
So what is the fix?
Fixing the gap between responsibility, authority, and accountability isn’t about changing job titles. It’s about changing structures, expectations, and trust. Here’s where organizations can start.
Redesign Roles with Authority in Mind
Responsibility must come with the ability to act.
- Giving program and project managers real influence over resource allocation, risk management, and prioritization.
- Empowering agile teams to shape their backlog, reject unsustainable scope, and negotiate with stakeholders.
Clarify Accountability and Share It Appropriately
Too often, accountability rolls downhill while control stays at the top.
- Align decision rights with the roles expected to be accountable.
- Recognize that program outcomes are shared: delivery isn’t just the team’s responsibility, just as budget outcomes aren’t only the PMO’s.
If you want collective ownership, you need shared clarity.
Shift from Oversight to Enablement
For PMOs: instead of enforcing process for process’s sake, act as enablers of flow and value.
- Breaking down bottlenecks.
- Advocating for systemic authority alignment.
- Acting as translators between exec expectations and team capacity.
For agile leaders: support teams by protecting their autonomy, not micromanaging their delivery.
Make Empowerment Explicit
Don’t assume people know what they can or can’t do. Document it, say it, reinforce it. Whether it’s a RACI matrix, team charter, or working agreement, clarity avoids conflict.
When PMOs and agile teams are aligned on what they own, what they can influence, and what they’re accountable for, you get high-trust, high-performance systems. Without that alignment, even the best teams will hit structural limits they can’t control.
Empowerment isn’t a buzzword or a vague cultural ideal, it’s the direct result of aligning responsibility, authority, and accountability. When those three elements work together, people are not just enabled, they are truly empowered to deliver outcomes that matter.