Accountability Means Transparency

Rupert Murdoch’s media empire came under increased scrutiny in recent days when the British Parliament issued a strong rebuke of News Corp’s internal management practices. Hacking allegations are now the subject of a wide-ranging Scotland Yard investigation at Murdoch’s News International newspapers. More than 9000 cell and landline phones may have been hacked to obtain inside scoops or other reporting advantages. While News Corp has already shut down the tabloid at the center of the scandal, News of the World, it now faces new accusations that other newspapers under its ownership umbrella have been engaged in a variety of questionable activities.

How transparent must News Corp become to effectively address and overcome this crisis? Completely transparent. Whenever a leader or organization offers transparency, it is a clear demonstration of taking accountability—the sort of accountability that overcomes obstacles and produces results. When such transparency is missing, you can’t help wondering and asking: “What are they hiding or pretending not to know?” In the end, a lack of transparency almost always indicates a lack of accountability.

Transparency produces accountability and accountability produces transparency. You can’t have one without the other. Accountable people and organizations know that real accountability requires providing an accounting (being answerable) for how they have discharged their duties, responsibilities, opportunities, and stewardships. To be transparent is to be “easy to perceive or detect; to be open to scrutiny.” Wherever you find true accountability, you will encounter an “ease and efficiency in perceiving or detecting” how things are going, as well as a general “openness to scrutiny.”

For more information on how accountability and transparency go hand in hand, please join the Accountability Community^® by visiting www.partnersinleadership.com