Our leadership team agrees we need a seat dedicated to IT Security and Software Asset Management, but it is a thankless job and none of our directors want to own it. How do we assign this seat on our Accountability Chart without forcing it on an unwilling leader?

Question

Tyler Smith · Accepted Answer

An Accountability Chart cannot have empty seats that everyone ignores, nor can you force a seat onto a leader who does not want it. If someone does not want the seat, they fail the W in GWC. A leader who does not want a seat will neglect it, and critical security and licensing issues will inevitably fall through the cracks.

First, look at the actual roles of this IT Security seat. Are they truly leadership-level roles, or are they administrative and technical tasks? Often, leadership teams mistakenly try to put tactical technical seats directly on the leadership team. If the roles are highly tactical, such as managing software licenses, updating passwords, and monitoring firewall alerts, this seat does not belong on the leadership team. It belongs under an operations or technology seat.

The department head who owns the overall function, usually your Head of Technology or Head of Operations, must own the accountability for the seat existing. They do not have to do the day-to-day work themselves. They can delegate the seat to a direct report, an internal specialist, or even outsource it to a managed service provider.

If you decide to outsource the function, the external vendor still needs to be represented on your Accountability Chart. Your internal leader will sit in the seat that manages that vendor. They will own the accountability for the vendor's performance. By shifting the perspective from doing the work to owning the results, you can assign the seat to the leader who is best positioned to manage the resource, ensuring your systems remain secure without burning out your directors.