When Managers Say “Take Ownership” but Keep Control

The phrase “take ownership” is frequently used in an attempt to promote accountability. However, it is used in conjunction with low decision-making power in many organizations. Individuals are expected to “own” an outcome, yet the power to make key decisions is highly centralized, which is an issue of autonomy and accountability. Authority can be defined in terms of formal authority and real authority, according to a study in ASQ (Administrative Science Quarterly). Individuals are expected to “own” an outcome, yet the power to make key decisions is highly centralized.

Psychological ownership is often associated with motivation, according to a study published in the Journal of Organizational Behavior (Pierce, Kostova, and Dirks, 2001). People are more likely to be engaged if they have control over situations. However, this feeling of control is lost if people are expected to own things without being given authority.

Managers may have control due to risks and accountability. Managers may change their style to be in control in times of pressure, according to a study published in Harvard Business Review (Goleman, 2000). This could give mixed signals, as people are given autonomy but not given authority.


This is experienced as ambiguity because people are expected to perform on one hand; on the other hand, they need to get approvals for things. Structures and autonomy are likely to make people perform better, whereas ambiguity is likely to make people perform poorly, according to a study published in the Journal of Applied Psychology (Baer and Frese, 2003).

This process also extends to trust because it can be perceived as a lack of trust in an employee’s judgment when there is accountability without authority. This can, in turn, affect their level of initiative, as they realize that no matter what they are expected to do, decisions are still made from the top. It can be said that the language of ownership is about empowerment, but it is the structure that defines whether it is functional or symbolic.

It is only symbolic, and understanding this process can explain why an employee is unable to fulfill their role, not because they are unwilling to do so, but because of the disconnect between accountability and control in organizational systems.