Gaming

Davies introduces the term “accountability sinks”,[5] which remove the ownership or responsibility for decisions made. The sink obscures or deflects responsibility,[6] and contributes towards a set of outcomes that appear to have been generated by a black box.[7] Whether a rule book, best practices, or computer system, these accountability sinks "scramble feedback"[8] and make it difficult to identify the source of mistakes and rectify them. An accountability sink breaks the links between decision makers and individuals, thus preventing feedback from being shared as a result of the system malfunction.[9] The end result, he argues, is protocol politics, where there is no head, or accountability. Decision makers can avoid the blame for their institutional actions, while the ordinary customer, citizen or employee face the consequences of these managers' poor decision making.