Hacker News Reader

I took it to mean clearly delineated responsibilities (i.e. who gets blamed when a part / aspect doesn't work).

If there are unclear boundaries between responsibilities, things will fall through the gaps when one group assumes another will take care of something.

Furthermore, when people are held responsible for quality completion of a task, they are often more driven to achieve the task at-quality. This must be balanced with not over-taxing them, but that's a given.

Correct!

I take it to mean when blame is being aimed you are not in the line of fire.

interesting - I understand it differently, namely as in:

"at a project's beginning, define rules such as 'if component X explodes, it is team ABC's fault'".

context:

> 37. (Henshaw's Law) One key to success in a mission is establishing clear lines of blame.

Blame is just another word for responsibility. If you don’t have clear lines of blame you don’t have clear responsibilities.

think org chart. now put your cynical hat on.