Demise of Acceptance of Blame

The acceptance of shame has been long dead. Shame as still officially defined is: “A painful emotion caused by consciousness of guilt, shortcoming or impropriety.” Synonyms are dishonor and disgrace. We rarely see the consciousness of guilt or dishonor or disgrace. What is more often seen is the pain of getting caught or outright denial until the evidence is painfully insuperable. Then there comes an expression of sorrow, maybe a resignation. But shame?

The same is now true for blame. It was once the mark of a leader to accept blame. Now so-called leaders deflect blame, eschew blame, blame others. The latest example comes from former Chairman of the Federal Reserve, Alan Greenspan, in his testimony before the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission. According to Greenspan (reminiscent of the testimony of former Treasury Secretary Paulson and current Treasury Secretary Geithner when pressed on the advisability of the billion dollar bailout of the very institutions that almost torpedoed the world economy), the great recession would have been much worse if it hadn’t been for him. No way to prove that, but no way to disprove it.

Greenspan was Chairman of the Fed for almost 20 years. He had a birds-eye view of the dangerous risks being increasingly taken by the financial community during his watch.  He refused to take action to rein in those risks. If anything, he encouraged them. But when everything went badly south, don’t blame him. He gladly accepted kudos when the counterfeit economy created by those risks seemed never-ending. But don’t blame him for being in never-land while those he regulated were acting recklessly.

In a sense, there is no blame game any more, because when something bad happens, it’s nobody’s fault — at least, not if you’re in a top position like Greenspan was. It’s little wonder that employees at all levels refuse to accept blame. They’re just like their bosses.

1. 

   Kenneth Downs says:

   April 16, 2010 at 10:42 am

   Enjoyed this article. I teach a lesson in Sunday school and have used the lesson at work regarding the subject of blame having gone the way of the lead pencil. In these modern times, we use pens and type with computers unlike the old days of using lead pencils. Today, if we make a mistake, we can cover up with whiteout or back space, so there never was a mistake. People who use a pencil do so with the realization that mistakes are made and those mistakes must be corrected.

   While this may not be analogous to your article, the basic premise is the same. We learn from our mistakes, but if no one is to blame for a mistake does anyone ever learn?

   Thanks for your article.

   Kenny
2. 

   John Phillips says:

   April 16, 2010 at 1:09 pm

   Kenny,

   Thanks for your comment.

   This has the makings of a good Sunday School lesson indeed. I think your analogy is perfect.

   John
3. 

   Alan Patterson says:

   April 19, 2010 at 4:18 pm

   I believe the lack of acceptance of blame is another bi-product of the preoccupation on the part of parents and schools with a child’s self-esteem. Too may adults parent with an emphasis on protecting their child’s feelings to the point that they diminish the impact of appropriate consequences for inappropriate behavior (if the consequences exist at all). At what point did we stop chastising our kids for a bad report from school and start assuming there is something wrong with the teacher? Allied with these parents are public school educators who tiptoe through the self-esteem tulips avoiding such words as “fail”, and expousing messages such as there are no loosers and everyone is a winner for having participated. The cold, hard reality of the workplace (although the laws are chipping away at this as we speak) is that if you screw up there is a price to pay, at the very least blame to accept. And one’s ability to accept blame, learn from the mistake and move on is the sign of a healthy adult employee, one whom the employer now has more reason to think will succeed. But, alas, today the preservation of one’s over-inflated self-esteem often trumps the acceptance of any blame, and remorse is felt mostly for the fact of having been caught, and oftened accompanied by self-absorbtion with with one’s hurt feelings and woeful cries of “my boss is harassing me”.
4. 

   Gin says:

   April 20, 2010 at 1:25 pm

   Heard a story on the news today of a 7th grader in a Houston ISD school whom a teacher said was pretending her fingers were a gun and pointing them at the teacher’s back and making “pow” noises. The child was taken to the principal’s office and has since been suspended for making a terroristic threat. Not too sure the penalty was appropriate, but that’s not my call.

   The point I wanted to make was that in an interview with the mother, she indicated that there was no “heirarchy” in her home and that the child was fed and clothed in her home but basically was not disciplined. If I truly understood the interview correctly, who is to blame for the child’s being in trouble — the school for possibly overreacting or the mother for not disciplining her child in the first place?

   I agree that society is moving to far afield from making individuals accept responsibilty for their actions to the point that very little is wrong anymore.

   I like the Sunday School lesson Kenny used too.
5. 

   John Phillips says:

   April 20, 2010 at 1:35 pm

   Alan and Gin,

   Thanks much for your comments. Given the number of views of this post, the subject has apparetnly struck a nerve.

   It’s entirely possible that we’ve gone past the point of no return in schools and workplaces.

   John
6. 

   Dan says:

   April 20, 2010 at 5:48 pm

   I find this is true with many of our court decisions as well. The case of Ricci v DeStefano, the one Supreme Court Justice Sotomayor presided over as a Federal Appellate judge was a prime example of no one accepting blame. The case involved several white firefighters who passed promotional exams that made them eligible for Captain positions, but were denied those promotions because not enough minorities paseed the exam. The city of New Haven tossed out the results becuase of fear they would be sued under the disparate impact prong of Title VII, which basicaaly states that a testing mechanism that excludes a significnat number of protected class members may be discriminatory. However, there were several black and hispanic firefighters who did pass the exam, just not enough to be “statistically significant” Now, my question is; if just some minorities passed the exam, but not many, is the test itself to blame, or is it the failure of the test takers to properly prepare for the exam? When will we stop blaming the test, and start holding individuals accountable for puting in the necessary time to actually learn the required material?
7. 

   John Phillips says:

   April 20, 2010 at 6:00 pm

   Dan,

   Thanks for your comment.

   I’m very familiar with the New Haven case. I blogged about the Supreme Court’s decision and also about Sotomayor’s role in the case before the Supreme Court decided it. However, I had not thought about the case in this context. I think you make some very good points about its relevance to this subject.

   I’m afraid that accountability is just something that gets talked about. I think we’re beyond requiring people to be accountable, and I think this starts at the top. When some executive escapes accountability, no one below him or her is going take accountability seriously. Sad, but probably true, unfortunately.

   Thanks again.

   John