Assigning blame vs. holding accountable... the difference?

[steve-in-kville]

I am sure there is a difference between the two. Please discuss.

[MaxPC]

Outstanding topic, Steve. My rambling thoughts this morning:
In my perspective and experience, I have found that especially with those who tend to be pessimistic and negative that a preference for the blame game is pronounced. They prefer to assign blame and walk away.

Holding accountability though is a means of support for the errant one. It is a partnership; a walking with the individual to help that individual renew and form a better discipleship.

Of course, we do have those individuals who obsessively and persistently refuse to renew and reform and only seek to destroy through arguments and disruption. We are instructed by Jesus to shake the dust and walk away from those as their pride blinds them.

[steve-in-kville]

I think it is a matter of what goals are in mind. Do we need to assign blame to appease the masses? Or do we want to work at resolving the issue for the greater good?

[Ernie]

I don't think it is good for individuals or organizations or churches to make repeated failures, year after year, and no one needs to answer for it.
In some scenarios, when you try to hold someone accountable, they will make statements like, "we all make mistakes" or "nobody is perfect" or "God uses people with big faults to accomplish his work". While all these are true, it enables people to hurt others, run over them, neglect them, etc. time after time.

I certainly want forgiveness when I fail. And I hope I will be forgiven if I fail in the same matter several times. But if I avoid looking at my problems, and don't feel bad about the things I do, and minimize how I hurt others, I do not deserve forgiveness, even if people forgive me anyway.

Assigning blame has the goal of making sure the culprit and/or the entity know who made the bad mistakes so that they can be shamed.

Holding accountable has the goal of making the person and their world a better place to be.

[MaxPC]

All of these well-thought perspectives reminds of a discussion among colleagues in the 1980s.

Under discussion was the different methods for counseling students because of the differences in personalities and problems.

My friend summed it up thusly:
-Some you can just have a quiet word and the problem disappears.
-If they are from X, you need a 2x4 and to spell it out how to correct their problem.
-If they have a history of substance abuse, and they decide to stay, keep the 2x4 because you will need it again, and again.

I am not sure I agree with all of his summary but it did and does remind me that there are cultural personality types and social behaviors everywhere; and that the responses of those who have had a history of substance abuse have patterns of paranoia and aggression.

EG The person from NY who gets in everyone’s tea may employ that behavior as a part of the culture in which he is raised.

A few thoughts over my second cuppa. YMMV.

[Bootstrap]

Holding accountable requires authority over the people involved. It also requires actually understanding the facts. It usually occurs more slowly. It isn't done in order to promote yourself. It's not about revenge.

Assigning blame requires none of that.

[Joy]

Holding accountable requires authority over the people involved.

I'm not sure I agree with that. Do we not as Christians have a responsibility toward those we love if we see them choosing a dangerous path?

How would correcting others on this forum fit into this? Should only the mods do that?

[Bootstrap]

Holding accountable requires authority over the people involved.

I'm not sure I agree with that. Do we not as Christians have a responsibility toward those we love if we see them choosing a dangerous path?

I do, but I don't think that's the same thing as holding someone accountable. They are accountable to God, not to us. You cannot hold someone accountable if they are not accountable to you. An employee is accountable to the boss who can fire him or her. Another colleague may suggest and encourage that they do better, but cannot hold that employee accountable.

Often, others at the workplace just gossip about that other person, which usually makes things worse. And it's not what the Bible tells us to do. But sometimes it feels like there's a "self-righteous gossip" that isn't really righteous at all.

How would correcting others on this forum fit into this? Should only the mods do that?

I do think we should correct others, but with the awareness that they are not accountable to us. We absolutely should be talking about what we think the Bible calls us to do and what it calls us to avoid.

And we should avoid sins of speech. Gossip. Judging others as though we had the inside scoop. Often, people seem to use the phrase "holding accountable" as an excuse for sin.

[Thomas_muntzer]

Great topic. I think the difference is when you only focus in the problem or the mistake the other person did while holding accountable is more like a constructive critic you say why you thing the other person make wrong and that's it