Responsibility is often reduced to compliance and rulebooks, but Louise Bringselius argues that something essential gets lost along the way: the courage to act for another human being. In her latest book Moraliskt ansvar: Att vara medmänniska (Volante), the researcher, author and public commentator explores how leaders can combine responsibility for systems with responsibility for people and recognise when compliance to the rules would mean failing the person or purpose those rules are meant to serve. This requires of judgement and moral courage, she argues.
- What characterises a manager who takes relational responsibility, in concrete behaviours rather than just attitude?
A manager who takes relational responsibility puts the encounter with the other person ahead of blind rule-compliance, and encourages employees to do the same. They ask what is at stake for the person involved, and what the consequences would be of submitting to every system, rule and routine. I explain this by contrasting relational responsibility with system responsibility. It doesn’t mean disregarding rules and systems, but using moral judgement to understand their purpose, assess how they should be applied and recognise when an internal routine may need to be questioned or set aside. Concretely, I’d point to these behaviours:
- Seeing the person, not just the case. Trying to understand the person affected before making a decision.
- Recognising when an internal routine may need to be adapted, questioned or set aside.
- Taking responsibility for how people are affected by one’s own and the team’s actions.
- Speaking up to superiors when their demands harm people or have other unreasonable consequences.
- Staying present when moral dilemmas arise, and encouraging safe, open discussion about them.
- Where is the line between leaning on routines to create fairness, and using them as a shield to avoid acting?
The line comes down to the purpose of the routine, and where the focus lies at the moment of decision. Most routines, rules and governance systems exist for good reason. They create predictability, counter arbitrariness and protect vulnerable parties. But when a routine stops being a tool for achieving fairness and instead becomes a way to avoid personal responsibility, a line has been crossed. Routines and rules shouldn’t be applied mechanically, but with attentiveness to needs and consequences. When that attentiveness disappears, the routine becomes a shield, and the system has shifted from means to end in itself. Another sign the line has been crossed is when no one wants to take responsibility for the consequences of a decision, and responsibility is displaced onto the routine itself. The routine then becomes a substitute for human judgement and moral courage.
- What organisational conditions make it easier or harder for managers to take relational responsibility?
I’ll answer in terms of what makes it easier:
- Mandate and psychological safety. Managers and employees need to know that they are trusted to exercise judgement and can raise concerns without fear of retaliation.
- Time and proximity. Relational responsibility requires enough time to meet, listen to and understand the people affected by a decision.
- Flexible routines, rules, processes and IT systems. Systems need to be adaptable to the needs of the situation.
- Understanding the intent behind rules and routines, and their underlying rationale. If they exist to protect people, they shouldn’t be used for the opposite.
- User-friendly, co-created routines, rules, processes and digital solutions. Employees and managers need to be able to influence the systems.
- Balanced governance that doesn’t disproportionately privilege financial values, but allows for discussion of trade-offs and moral dilemmas.
- How does trust-based leadership, which you’ve researched for a long time, connect to the relational responsibility you write about now?
Trust gives people room to take moral responsibility. When we micromanage people, we reduce their responsibility to simply following the system. With trust, we instead require them to use their moral judgement and consider the consequences of their decisions, which means those consequences also need to be made visible. Trust and responsibility could be described as twins: Trust creates room for people to take responsibility, while responsible action helps to sustain and deepen trust. But that requires seeing the person and building relationships based on care. If we blindly follow systems, we risk people getting hurt.
- What can a manager do in practice to strengthen their own judgement and courage, rather than leaning on the rulebook?
Judgement shouldn’t be pitted against rules. It can, however, be pitted against BLIND rule-compliance. Rules normally exist to guide and support judgement, promote fairness and protect important values. A manager needs to know the rules, understand their purpose and hierarchy, and recognise when an internal routine needs to be questioned or adapted. This takes courage and judgement. A few practices:
- Pause at moral dilemmas and reflect further. Don’t just ask which rule applies, make room for the bigger picture. Which values are competing, what’s at stake? Consider consulting a group of people who think differently.
- Seek the perspective of those affected. Talk to the customer, the patient or the student, and meet them with openness.
- Justify decisions morally, not only by pointing to rules. If you can’t stand behind a decision morally, it may not be the right one.
- Practise small acts of moral courage, for your own sake and others’. Defend a vulnerable colleague, or point out when a routine should be set aside.
- Examine your own conscience. After an event, reflect on whether it was right or wrong toward the other person, and use that for learning.
About
Louise Bringselius is an Associate Professor (docent) in organisation and management and currently works as a researcher at the Stockholm School of Economics. In recent years, she has taken a she has become a prominent voice in Swedish debates on public administration, trust and leadership. She has written several acclaimed books, including Psychological Safety (2023, Volante), and she served as a Research Director of the Swedish Government’s Trust Delegation from 2017 to 2019. Her latest book, Moraliskt ansvar: Att vara medmänniska (Volante), was released in September 2026.
Learn more
At Beyond Talking, we regularly invite researchers and practitioners to share insights and experiences on how to bridge research and organisational life.
Beyond Talking is closely connected to the academic world, and our methods are grounded in modern research. By making insights accessible and applicable, we aim to support leaders, teams and organizations in navigating complexity, growing their collective intelligence and building sustainable ways of working.