In a business meeting or social function, few words cut through the din and kill the mood more quickly than “accountability.” It is one of those words that instantly sets one on edge despite its familiarity and every day usage. After the recent conviction of Derek Chauvin for the murder of George Floyd, policy makers and pundits alike pointed to accountability as they spoke about the trial outcome. Accountability is something that people understand, yet seems to become harder and harder to define the more one seeks to move beyond rhetorical flourishes to examine the word itself. For example, rather than providing a straightforward definition, Merriam-Webster’s listing for accountability leads one down a series of root-word associations such as accountable and account to ultimately land on something related to the four R’s of accountability: Respondents, results, records, and rationale.

It takes money to make money, so the saying goes. Even for businesses that get started with little or no direct contribution of cash, there is always an investment of time, expertise, and other resources that can be traced back to money. But what about the self-made millionaire who pulled herself up by her bootstraps? Great! Where did she get the money to buy her first pair of boots with just the right straps for pulling? Were they given to her? By whom and how much did they pay for them? For those looking to start a new business, or leaders of existing businesses looking to do something new, it is a useful reminder that investments of time and resources are always required. But what if the idea of needing money to make money actually obscures a more important point? What if there is actually a condition that must be satisfied, or decision that must be made, before resources are invested?