Concept X

on

GB Concept X. Every service responsibility should be matched by an equal service authority—the scope of such authority to be always well defined whether by tradition, by resolution, by specific job description, by appropriate charters or by legal instruments.

World Service Long Form Every service responsibility should be matched by an equal service authority—the scope of such authority to be always well defined whether by tradition, by resolution, by specific job description or by appropriate charters and bylaws.

World Service Short Form X. Every service responsibility should be matched by an equal service authority, with the scope of such authority well defined.

Application in AA

  • Responsibility vs authority
    • Responsibility
      • Having a job to do
      • Being accountable for the results
      • Foreknowledge of accountability encourages responsible action:
        • Being hard-working
        • Being diligent
        • Exercising positive and negative aspects of leadership (see Concept IX)
    • Authority
      • Decision-making power
        • The power to make decisions
        • Others' respect for those decisions
          • If others don't respect those decisions, they won't implement them
          • The decision-maker then becomes a paper tiger
      • Resources
        • Money
        • People
        • Materials
        • Equipment
  • Basic principles:
    • If I have a job to do, I must be accountable for the results
      • This is what closes the loop of Right of Decision: ask, consult, act, report
    • Foreknowledge of accountability encourages responsible behaviour
    • No one wants censure, redirection, reorganisation, or replacement
    • If you want to keep the job, you have to do it properly
    • If you want to keep your reputation, you have to do the job properly
    • This means reporting back to whoever gave me the job to do
    • I must also have the power plus the resources to do the job
    • This principle is embodied all through the Concepts
  • Desired outcomes
    • Effective function
    • Efficient function
    • Harmonious function
    • Avoidance of:
      • Conflict
      • Confusion
      • Ineffectiveness
      • Inefficiency
  • Where does final responsibility and ultimate authority reside?
    • It resides with the groups (Concept I)
    • But, for practical purposes, each layer of service sees the higher layer as holding a delegated share of that final responsibility and ultimate authority
    • For instance, a sub-committee of Region sees Region as having final responsibility and ultimate authority
    • In normal circumstances, it cannot 'bypass' Region, rejecting its final responsibility and ultimate authority on a particular matter
    • This is notwithstanding Concept V, which establishes a 'safety valve' for situations of impasse or misconduct, etc.
    • This is why the essay talks about 'a point, or succession of points, where there is an final responsibility or an ultimate authority'
  • Delegation of responsibility and authority
    • The whole structure depends on the delegation of authority in line with the delegation of responsibility
    • Without that, each higher layer becomes the 'small czar' of the lower layer
    • The layer above delegates some of its authority to you
    • That means its authority is no longer absolute (see Concept XII)
    • Otherwise
      • Each lower layer would simply comprise order-takers
      • Each higher layer would retain decision-making authority but delegate responsibility
      • Each lower layer would be given responsibility (a job to do) but without the decision-making authority to get the job done properly
  • Responsibility without authority
    • A layer acts outside its delegated scope of authority ('going rogue')
    • This means taking action it is not authorised to take
      • For example, undertaking public information work which spills over into a much larger area than authority is given for
  • Authority without responsibility
    • This is where people are not given a job to do but try to exercise power
    • Example 1:
      • A group poses a question to Conference
      • Conference makes a recommendation to the Literature Committee
      • The group then tries to influence the work of the Literature Committee by direct communication / complaint at Region meetings
    • Example 2:
      • The General Service Board issues directives to Groups on how to apply safeguarding law
      • However, the GSB has no authority over groups
      • The directives (e.g. the group secretary recording the details of all contacts between newcomers and existing members) are the responsibility of the group
      • The group is carrying the can for implementing an unworkable decision it did not make (e.g. having to instruct its members to send the secretary details of all meetings between anyone under a year of sobriety and any other AA member including dates, times, locations, full names, and contact details!)
  • Mismatch of authority and responsibility
    • This happens where the higher layer gives the lower layer a job to do, but without sufficient decision-making authority / resources
      • The higher layer retains authority but delegates the responsibility
      • The lower layer is then prevented from doing the job because it has no authority
      • ... and cannot therefore be held accountable
    • In turn, this removes real power from the higher layer:
      • If it does not grant the lower layer authority, the lower layer cannot actually do anything, and the process stalls
      • Example:
        • The Board authorises one of its sub-committees to produce a poster
        • Whatever the sub-committee comes up with, someone on the Board objects
        • This spooks the other members
        • Every design is rejected
        • No poster gets approved, because whilst responsibility is delegated to a lower level, authority is kept at a higher level
      • Result:
        • Buck-passing
          • The higher level blames the lower level for not getting the job done
          • The lower level blames the higher level for not providing the authority to get the job done
  • Definition of responsibility and authority
    • What does this involve?
      • Who is responsible for what jobs?
      • Who decides on what?
      • Who has what resources?
    • Why do we need to do this?
      • Any particular element of responsibility and authority must reside somewhere
      • Risk of confusion, conflict, ineffectiveness, and inefficiency
      • Risk of the arbitrary, excessive, or malevolent exercise of power
    • Tradition: the collective memory of how things are usually done
      • This is mutable and unreliable
      • Groups and other entities often fail to record adequately that collective memory
    • Traditions and Concepts, e.g.
        • Tradition II
        • Tradition IX
        • Concept III
        • Concept IV
      • All of these act to regulate the delegation of responsibility and authority
    • Resolution: a specific policy decision
      • Ad hoc
      • In perpetuity
    • Job description
      • Group level job description (e.g. for the group secretary)
      • Job descriptions set out in manuals or handbooks
      • Job descriptions set out in terms of reference (sub-committees)
      • Director, executive, and staff job descriptions
    • Charters and by-laws
      • Conference
      • Board
  • What is defined?
    • The content of duties
    • The deliverables
    • Schedules, timelines, deadlines, and time expenditure
    • Resource allocation
    • Scope of decision-making authority
    • Stakeholders for the purposes of consultation
    • Elder statesmen for the provision of technical and spiritual assistance
    • Record-keeping
    • Reporting systems
  • Emergency veto
    • Whilst authority and responsibility are delegated in equal measure, the higher level retains right of veto
    • This must be exercised only in an emergency
    • E.g.
      • The lower level is ineffective (it achieves too little)
      • It constantly exceeds its defined scope and purpose (it achieves too much)
    • The availability of this emergency veto is itself a silent guiding force
  • Worked example: sub-committee
    • The chair of a sub-committee is responsible (accountable) to the body that appointed him or her
      • E.g. the chair of a regional sub-committee charged with organising a workshop
    • Final decision must reside with the chair
    • The democratic principle (Concept XII) and the Right of Participation (Concept IV) mean that everyone on the committee is heard ...
    • ... and the ideal is discussion, vote, and substantial unanimity
    • The chair must effectively have right of veto / casting vote / the right to override individual members of the sub-committee or even the whole sub-committee
    • If the chair is accountable (i.e. has responsibility), the chair must also have authority
    • For instance:
      • The committee chair overrides a decision by a committee member which would jeopardise the success of the entire event
        • E.g. a last-minute switch in who is chairing the workshop
      • Without that override, the workshop could be chaos, because the workshop chair would not be prepared
      • The committee chair would be responsible for the disastrous results
      • But the authority for that decision resided elsewhere (lower down the structure)
      • Thus the committee chair had responsibility without authority ...
      • ... and the committee member had authority without responsibility
    • What to do, as the chair, if there is a stalemate
      • Override the committee (exercising the veto)
        • This could risk losing the committee: they might resign or become hostile or uncooperative
        • Be prepared to be accountable to the higher authority for this decision
        • Be prepared to have to reappoint volunteers & start from scratch
        • Be prepared for non-cooperation on handover
      • Refer the question up to the higher authority
  • Avoidance of double-headed management
    • Any service person or entity is accountable to only one higher level
    • Examples of where this principle is breached
      • Conventions not wholly within the AA structure
        • A convention committee that wants the sponsorship and endorsement of an Intergroup or Region but wins the bid to host a committee granted by an external organisation (e.g. the board of a roving convention incorporated as a charity)
        • That convention committee then has financial and operational responsibilities towards the roving convention (which seeds the money, recoups the surplus, and establishes parameters)
        • However, that convention also has financial and operational responsibilities towards the sponsoring Intergroup or Region
        • In this scenario, there is no way of resolving conflicting views or directives from the two sponsoring bodies
      • Sub-committees where the chair is appointed by the sub-committee
        • The chair of the sub-committee cannot be accountable both:
          • To the higher level (e.g. the Intergroup and Region) and:
          • To the sub-committee members
        • If there were a conflict between the interests or views of the higher level and those of the sub-committee members, there would be no way of resolving that

Application in life

  • Being responsible (= acting up to the level of authority delegated by God)
    • Essentially, this means:
      • Being hard-working
      • Being diligent (attention to detail)
      • Being alert to strengths and weaknesses
      • Being alert to opportunities and threats
      • Acting in a timely manner
      • Asking for help where necessary
      • Consulting others where necessary
  • Having boundaries (= not acting beyond the level of authority delegated by God)
    • Not exceeding the scope of delegated authority (e.g. in a work context)
    • Minding my own business
    • Not interfering with others
    • Not undermining or circumventing established structures of responsibility and authority
    • Being concerned with what lies 'outside the hula hoop' only where:
      • Something affects common welfare
      • Something affects 'inside the hula hoop'
    • Invoking Tradition IV / Concept V only sparingly
    • Invoking the 'ultimate authority veto' only sparingly
  • Within the family (or other unit)
    • Responsibilities and authorities are delegated out by the collective to the individual
    • Others still retain a stake as part of the final responsibility and ultimate authority
    • Delegation is not a blank cheque
  • Authority without responsibility = recklessness
    • If I do not have to face the consequences of an action, I cannot direct it, e.g.
      • Decisions other people, e.g. sponsees or friends, make in their lives
      • E.g. Whether or not or how someone makes a tricky amend
  • Responsibility without authority = powerlessness
    • If I am being held responsible for something over which I have no control, I push back
    • If I have no power over something, it is irrational to concern myself with it or worry about it
  • When taking on responsibilities, ensure I understand:
    • The content of my duties
    • The deliverables
    • Schedules, timelines, deadlines, and time expenditure
    • Resources to be made available
    • Scope of decision-making authority
    • Stakeholders for the purposes of consultation
    • Sources of technical and other systems
    • Records to be kept
    • Reporting mechanism
  • When viewing 'the world'
    • Match authority with responsibility: hold those accountable who are genuinely responsible because they have actual authority
      • Corollary: avoid proxy and collective victimhood and blame
  • Delegation of final responsibility and ultimate authority
    • While final responsibility and ultimate authority reside with God ...
    • ... that responsibility and authority is gradually delegated through the world
    • Example: doing what a group or a sponsor suggests
    • Yes, God is ultimately in charge
    • But God has chosen that channel for the exercise of that responsibility and authority
    • (Although be willing to push back when person or entity in question is illegitimate)
Labels: