A Review of Acceptance of responsibility in Government Organizations

Accountability has a complex meaning. Achieving an appropriate accountability system is one of the overall objectives of most of the publicsector reforms. Everyone based on his/her thoughts and opinions, and also according to his/her perception, experience and analysis examines its certain aspects. The term accountability refers to a specific responsibilities, results, and outcomes. Cutt and Murry (2002) viewedaccountability as the basis of performance measurement, evaluation and reporting; and they believed that it must be used as a criterion forperformance measurement, reporting and evaluation in public and nonprofit organizations. Motevasseli (1994, 58) considered accountabilityas timely reaction to changes in interests and preferences over time, and the necessity of changing objectives; and he generally proposes thediscussion of moving target. Accountability is one way to create public trust (Alvany & Danaeefard, 2001). Accountability is a driving force thatpresses key players to be responsible for their performance, and also to ensure the good performance of public services (Monavvarian, 2000, 160). And finally, Mostafaei (1993, 8) considered accountability as one of the factors of administration system democratization. Nowadays,governments should be accountable for their policies and actions. Every government requires a responsive system, and having a suitableresponsive system is essential for democracy. Governmental organizations are created by and for people, so they should beaccountable to them. The relationship between government and citizens forms the responsive system, by which governmental organizations do related duties, and citizens allow these duties to be done -on the condition that the lawyer does not overstep the limits and be accountable- (Hughes, 1998, 288-289).