The Importance of responsiveness in Strengthening Organizational Executability

Executability refers to an organization's ability to implement decisions and make plans, an ability recognized as a decisive indicator of the sustainable success of any organization.
However, among the many factors that affect feasibility—from financial resources to human resource skills—one of the most important, yet often overlooked, is responsiveness capacity. Responsiveness makes certain &ensure that resources are used correctly, errors and deviations do not go unaddressed, and decisions should align with accepted laws and values.
In its simplest definition, responsiveness means that each individual or organization explains its decisions and performance results to a higher authority.
This process is always a combination of reward for desirable performance and criticism or punishment for undesirable performance.
Responsiveness in organizations has various layers; four levels of accountability are recognized in management: organizational, legal, professional, and political.
Let us clarify these layers with an example from IMPASCO. Normally, four layers of accountability can be identified in this company, as shown in the figure below. In the first layer, the government and IMIDRO are the main employers. IMPASCO’s managers are expected to develop the country’s mineral resources, launch new projects, and generate sustainable revenue for the national economy. This level is political and strategic in nature, placing employers & policymakers in the role of the "principal" and IMPASCO’s managers in the role of the "broker."
The second layer concerns to the managers of IMPASCO, who are considered "agents" in relation to IMIDRO, but simultaneously act as "employers" for employees and contractors. They are responsible for defining performance indicators, entering into contracts, and controlling the quality and safety of work. This level represents organizational responsiveness.
The third layer includes employees and contractors. They are also considered agents vis‑à‑vis Impasco’s managers, but the quality of project execution and mine operation directly depends on their decisions and behavior. If contracts only focus on the quantity of production, this layer will have incomplete responsiveness, and the consequence will be evident in reduced productivity and weakened safety.
Finally, the fourth layer relates to Impasco's relationship with downstream industries and society. At this level, IMPASCO, as a 'broker,' must be responsive to the steel, cement, and aluminum industries that require raw materials, as well as to the local community and the environment affected by mining activities. This layer is mainly political and social, and the organization's legitimacy depends on it.
To be continued.