The widely accepted definition of delegation is "the assignment of a responsibility or authority to another person, usually from a manager to a subordinate." In this view of delegation, the manager transfers some of the manager's responsibilities — or some of the manager's authority — to a subordinate. If you believe you're delegating, in the sense that you're transferring responsibility or authority from yourself to a subordinate, you probably view yourself as responsible for getting something done — in effect, as a doer. And one of your tasks is to allocate some of your tasks to other doers.
That is not the most effective role for a manager. It is, however, how micromanagers view their roles.
In one sense, using the term delegation to describe what managers do is a tragic error that encourages micromanagement. Using the term implies that what we call delegation is the transfer of responsibility from manager to subordinate. In that sense, the delegation concept is itself problematic, because that isn't what happens when effective managers do their actual jobs.
Here are three insights about managers' jobs.
- Don't do; meta-do
- Effective managers Effective managers know that
the manager's job is not
to do, but to meta-doknow that the manager's job is not to do, but to meta-do. Managers allocate tasks to people who execute those tasks, and then the managers do what it takes to enable their subordinates to accomplish those tasks. Effective managers lead people and arrange for resources and infrastructure to support those people. They fly political "air cover" when necessary and they influence the organizational culture. They don't manage the tasks of the people who do the tasks. Managing the tasks is what the people who do the tasks do.
- The hands-on manager role is dangerous
- Some managers' jobs do require that they actually execute some tasks. They're in jobs sometimes described as "hands-on manager." This kind of job is a setup for failure. It's very difficult to keep straight in one's mind what work is to be executed personally, and what work is to be allocated to subordinates. The hands-on manager job creates inherent conflicts of perspective. Someone in this kind of job is likely to get into trouble about delegation, because the job is so poorly defined. See "The Risky Role of Hands-On Project Manager," Point Lookout for April 23, 2008, for more.
- Manager's responsibilities differ from subordinates' responsibilities
- Managers are indeed ultimately responsible for the work their subordinates do, but it's a kind of responsibility that differs from the responsibility the subordinates carry. The manager's responsibility is most evident when things don't happen as planned. When things do happen as planned, the manager's responsibility is to ensure that the people who executed those tasks get the credit they're due. When things don't happen as planned, the manager's responsibility is to investigate what went wrong, and then to see that corrective actions are taken so that things work better next time.
So if you feel that it's your job as a manager to delegate a task, there's a good chance that you were holding onto that task yourself. And if you were holding onto it, you might have been doing what micromanagers do. Top Next Issue
Is every other day a tense, anxious, angry misery as you watch people around you, who couldn't even think their way through a game of Jacks, win at workplace politics and steal the credit and glory for just about everyone's best work including yours? Read 303 Secrets of Workplace Politics, filled with tips and techniques for succeeding in workplace politics. More info
Your comments are welcomeWould you like to see your comments posted here? rbrenfBJUfayquRUgRLdZner@ChacxmrpjEuXXmHZZvJMoCanyon.comSend me your comments by email, or by Web form.
About Point Lookout
Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and found it useful, and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.
Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout, as an individual or as an organization.
Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in, anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.
More articles on Personal, Team, and Organizational Effectiveness:
- High Falutin' Goofy Talk
- Business speech and business writing are sometimes little more than high falutin' goofy talk, filled
with pretentious, overused images and puff phrases of unknown meaning. Here are some phrases that are
so common that we barely notice them.
- Recalcitrant Collaborators
- Much of the work we do happens outside the context of a team. We collaborate with people in other departments,
other divisions, and other companies. When these collaborators are reluctant, resistive, or recalcitrant,
what can we do?
- Four Popular Ways to Mismanage Layoffs: II
- Staff reduction is needed when expenses overtake revenue. But when layoffs are misused, or used too
late, they can harm the organization more than they help. Here's Part II of an exploration of four common
patterns of mismanagement, and some suggestions for those managers and other employees who recognize
the patterns in their own companies.
- How to Make Good Guesses: Tactics
- Making good guesses probably does take talent to be among the first rank of those who make guesses.
But being in the second rank is pretty good, too, and we can learn how to do that. Here are some
tactics for guessing.
- Symbolic Self-Completion and Projects
- The theory of symbolic self-completion holds that to define themselves, humans sometimes assert indicators
of achievement that either they do not have, or that do not mean what they seem to mean. This behavior
has consequences for managing project-oriented organizations.
Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout
- Coming October 17: Overt Belligerence in Meetings
- Some meetings lose their way in vain attempts to mollify a belligerent participant who simply will not be mollified. Here's one scenario that fits this pattern. Available here and by RSS on October 17.
- And on October 24: Conversation Irritants: I
- Conversations at work can be frustrating even when everyone tries to be polite, clear, and unambiguous. But some people actually try to be nasty, unclear, and ambiguous. Here's Part I of a small collection of their techniques. Available here and by RSS on October 24.
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenertvbaKZtioxXJFxner@ChacXErRYolmgPwEfhEloCanyon.com or (650) 787-6475, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.
Get the ebook!
Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:
- Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, USD 28.99)
Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline? Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info
- The Power Affect: How We Express Our Personal Power
- Many people who possess real organizational power have a characteristic demeanor. It's the way they project their presence. I call this the power affect. Some people — call them power pretenders — adopt the power affect well before they attain significant organizational power. Unfortunately for their colleagues, and for their organizations, power pretenders can attain organizational power out of proportion to their merit or abilities. Understanding the power affect is therefore important for anyone who aims to attain power, or anyone who works with power pretenders. Read more about this program.