LLM Book Knowledgebase

Roger Connors and Tom Smith

5 min read

Roger Connors and Tom Smith

Roger Connors and Tom Smith are co-founders of Partners in Leadership, a consulting firm specializing in accountability culture. They have co-authored a series of books on organizational accountability, beginning with The Oz Principle (1994) — which introduced the Above the Line / Below the Line model — and continuing with Change the Culture, Change the Game (2011), How Did That Happen? (2009), and Fix It: Getting Accountability Right (2015).

Their work has been applied in hundreds of organizations across industries, including Fortune 500 companies. Both are Utah-based and have ties to the business coaching and human performance space.

Intellectual Signature

Connors and Smith’s central thesis, consistent across their body of work, is that accountability — properly understood — is not punishment for failure but a proactive, chosen orientation toward results. The confusion between accountability-as-consequence and accountability-as-commitment is, in their view, the root cause of most organizational dysfunction.

“Accountability is a personal choice to rise above one’s circumstances and demonstrate the ownership necessary for achieving Key Results: See It, Own It, Solve It, and Do It.” — Fix It

This definition is carefully constructed: personal choice (not externally imposed), rise above circumstances (not wait for conditions to be ideal), demonstrate ownership (show, not just claim), Key Results (specific, defined outcomes).

Core Framework: Above and Below the Line

The Above the Line / Below the Line model, introduced in The Oz Principle and refined in subsequent books, organizes organizational behavior into two categories:

Below the Line — the psychological safety zone of victim thinking:

  • Ignoring or denying problems
  • “It’s not my job” / “It’s not my fault”
  • Confusion as cover
  • Pointing fingers
  • Waiting and watching

Above the Line — accountable behavior:

  • Seeing reality clearly (including uncomfortable reality)
  • Owning contribution to problems and solutions
  • Asking “What else can I do?”
  • Doing what you said you would do

The framework’s insight is that most people are not consciously choosing to be victims. They slide Below the Line when accountability feels dangerous — when admitting failure carries real consequences, when blaming others is the cultural norm, or when the organizational system rewards defensiveness over candor.

The Sixteen Practices of Accountable Behavior

Fix It identifies sixteen specific behaviors that constitute an above-the-line accountability culture. Key among them:

“1. Obtain the perspectives of others… 4. Hear and say the hard things to see reality… 8. Act on feedback… 9. Constantly ask, ‘What else can I do?‘… 13. Do the things they say they will do… 15. Track progress with proactive and transparent reporting.” — Fix It

The Role of Humility

A recurring theme that distinguishes Connors and Smith from simpler “accountability” frameworks:

“Humility is a deep, authentic acknowledgment that we can’t do it alone, that we should be mindful of the perspectives others bring, and that we can be better and do more with input from others.” — Fix It

Humility is not weakness — it is the prerequisite for accurate situational awareness (“See It”) and genuine problem-solving (“Solve It”). Organizations that confuse accountability with autonomy (the belief that needing others is a sign of weakness) systematically underperform.

The Feedback Imperative

Fix It places bidirectional feedback at the center of accountable culture:

“Feedback is oxygen. It’s lifeblood. We can’t grow and develop without it.” — Fix It

“Operating without feedback is like flying without radar: risky, dangerous, and even life threatening!” — Fix It

The practical challenge: most people dramatically underestimate how much feedback others have about their behavior, while simultaneously avoiding creating conditions where that feedback can be safely delivered. The book provides specific frameworks for both asking for and delivering candid feedback.

Key Results as the Foundation

Connors and Smith insist that accountability requires specific, measurable result definitions. Without them, accountability has no target:

“Accountability begins by clearly defining results. If the results are not clear, then accountability will break down, resulting in lower morale and misaligned work.” — Fix It

This aligns directly with John Doerr’s OKR framework and 4DX’s finish line requirement — all three frameworks converge on the insight that ambiguous goals make genuine accountability impossible.

The “What Else Can I Do?” Question

The five-word question that Fix It identifies as perhaps the most powerful in the accountability practitioner’s toolkit:

“‘What else can I do?’ are perhaps the five most powerful words anyone can say.” — Fix It

This question does three things simultaneously: it acknowledges that the current approach is insufficient, it rejects blame as a response, and it commits the speaker to continued creative problem-solving. It is an embodied act of Above the Line orientation.

Relationship to Other Authors in This Library

  • McChesney, Covey, Huling (4DX): 4DX’s cadence of accountability (weekly WIG sessions, explicit commitment-making, public scorekeeping) is the structural implementation of Connors and Smith’s cultural framework. The cultural framework tells you what to aim for; 4DX provides the mechanics
  • John Doerr (OKRs): OKRs as a transparency and goal-alignment system create the structural conditions within which Connors and Smith’s accountable behaviors become more natural and less risky
  • Shane Parrish (Clear Thinking): Parrish’s ego default — the tendency to protect self-image at the expense of accurate reality assessment — is exactly what Above the Line accountability is designed to interrupt. Both frameworks converge on the insight that defensiveness is the enemy of performance

Backlinks