Delegate — It’s for Your Own Sake

 

Managers often misunderstand what it is they delegate because many organizational cultures almost exclusively focus on tasks. However, tasks are just steppingstones to the ultimate goal. So, what do managers really delegate?

 

Paraphrasing Jack Welch, the late CEO of GE, managers allocate resources. At the end of the day allocating tasks really means delegating resources and responsibilities. That involves two parties, one allocating the resource — time, money, people, materials — and one receiving these resources. 

 

Risk Aversion vs. Opportunity to Improve

This delegation occurs against the background of personalities, roles and the organizational context. For example, if delegation plays out in an organization with little tolerance for mistakes, what is being delegated will likely resemble a list of to-do’s or just tasks. Managers will be less likely to delegate responsibility and subordinates are more likely to fear taking on such responsibilities. One extreme outcome is that managers jealously guard information and subordinates stop thinking because all they have to do is to move from task to task.

 

On the contrary, for learning organizations mistakes are an opportunity for improvement. They are more likely to tolerate risk. Managers tend to delegate goals rather than task lists. They will encourage subordinates not to fear accountability because they can rely on the organization to focus on learning from failure rather than punishing it. And in situations where mistakes have to be rectified, the team or department will pull together to resolve the problem.

 

It Takes Two to Tango

All this to say that real delegation requires two willing and able parties, one able and willing to let go of something and the other willing and able to accept something. Where this happens naturally, the culture can be described as “we are all in the same boat” and the outcome is what counts. That is contrary to a culture focused on who gets the credit.

 

The two operating words are of course “willing” and “able”. It is no use overwhelming newly hired junior staff with a project beyond their current abilities. Senior executives will also need and actively seek something resembling an onboarding even if required to manage a departmental transformation. For that reason, managers who aspire to be leaders should look at the five steps of delegation as a way to train their staff to become able to make independent decisions.

 

 

The Steps of Delegation

There are different approaches to the levels of delegation. Some count five steps, others count four but generally speaking they comprise the following:

1.     Directing

·      Basically the employee gets a list of tasks to do, when to do them and in what order. There is very little to no autonomy.

2.     Coaching 

·      The employee will get familiar with the topic and will be hand-held by his/her superior as he/she delivers ideas on how to address the issue.

·      The employee will work on ideas and suggestions with different levels of hand holding.

3.     Supporting 

·      The employee works almost autonomously on the project and reports back on the results before presenting them to the customer be that an internal or external stakeholder.

4.     Delegating

·      At this stage, the superior more or less throws the entire project across the fence for the employee to finish and present.

 

The more experienced staff are and the more leaders can trust them, the less leaders need to be involved and can expect them to make the right decisions. The overall idea is to develop people as shown in this graph. 

 

 

Managers Who “Risk” Believing in their Staff’s Abilities Benefit – Always

Unfortunately, there are too many organizational cultures with many experienced people but too little trust. They barely progress beyond step two or three of the five steps of delegation. Culture is a top to bottom process. Leaders can create a learning culture in their sphere of influence. This will be much more difficult where this sphere needs to be carved out in an organization driven by fear. However, even there, managers who successfully delegate will benefit from better ourcomes.

 

How so? Because they will benefit from the most important resource — people. Probably any organizations will at least pay lip service to the importance of their people. Those which live by this concept understand commitment to people goes both ways. The organization has expectations from its employees/people but the people working in that organization will also expect things. And there is evidence that skilled employees will not be motivated by more money. They want mastery (gain experience), autonomy (be able to make decisions and be accountable) and purpose (everyone – not just the millennials).

 

In the context of “hiring slowly and firing quickly” this means the hiring managers in an organization need to vet candidates for both attitude and aptitude. That will take time and may not fit with the schedule. However, the drain on time and energy with a hire gone wrong is too high a price. And if the wrong candidate slipped through, terminating the relationship sooner rather than later will save everyone a lot of headache down the road. It will also send a message to current staff and underline that culture is taken seriously.

 

Do You Really Want Brains or Just Hands on Deck?

How can managers learn to delegate? As Steve Jobs once said: “It doesn't make sense to hire smart people and then tell them what to do. We hire smart people so they can tell us what to do.” Here are some useful questions to gauge whether you let your smart people do their job: The first should be whether you hired smart people in the first place. If the answer is no one thing to think about is what prevented you from hiring them. With that come some follow up questions:

·      Was it down to budgetary constraints? 

·      Did you inherit a department? 

·      Did you create a clear job description with clear expectations?

·      Did you not really think about who would be the best person for the job? 

·      Were you scared that a smart hire would outsmart you? 

 

Once you have been able to honestly narrow it down you will be able to address the issue.

 

Learning organizations need people who are willing to take risks and be accountable. Risk averse organizations might prefer any set of hands and feet who just follow orders. Bums on seats do not need the full picture. And that may initially look easier to handle for managers. At the launch of a project, the manager might have thought through most of the steps at hand and then just needs people to execute. The temptation is to believe this will take less time. 

 

For the early project phase that may even be true. However, how much time do managers have to spend along the way checking in on (or possibly micro-managing) the employees who have been allocated to that project? Also ask yourself whether you would give your best for something whose full ramifications have never been explained to you. People will not feel invested if they believe their manager will take care of everything at the end of the day. They will be less likely to think of alternative and possibly better solutions. Will this result in the best possible project outcome? And how will a mediocre outcome further anyone’s career?

This post was first published March 3rd, 2023 in German on crimalin.com