object-oriented programming there are two related notions of delegation.
management is the process of getting results accomplished through others. A manager should provide team members with the information they require to do a good job, communicating with them frequently, and giving them clear guidelines on the results that are expected.Further, managers must also take the "relationship responsibility" for those with whom they work.
Delegation is the preferred approach to managing and coaching
people who have high skill and high will to complete the specific task at hand.
Why Delegate?
At a certain point, there are just too many facets to running a
successful business to continue doing it alone. In an increasingly complex business environment, with all the trends affecting business today, such as
globalization, the information technology explosion, strategic alliances, increased mergers and acquisitions, heightened competition, and higher expectations of nearly every customer, it just isn't possible to still be that one person in control of everything. Bringing in others to manage is an absolute necessity for survival now. Owners and managers should concentrate on the activities they do that bring the most value to their organization. You must perform only "essential activities" that give the company its competitive advantage over other companies in the industry. Learn to do less and manage more.
The delegation task is in finding the right persons and giving them the
right work. The sheer volume of management responsibilities necessitates
delegation. Always drop unnecessary work altogether; concentrate only on the tasks that nobody else can do. Necessary tasks that can be done by others should be delegated.Often the need to delegate is sparked by rapid business expansion, particularly as a result of acquisition.
How To Delegate?
Resist the temptation to keep tasks to yourself as a means of control or
a demonstration of power. Be a leader rather than a
mentor.
The first step is to recognize when it is time to delegate. Then
determine what to delegate, how, and to whom. To help you define and allot tasks, including your own, ask yourself three of Peter Drucker's questions:
What am I doing that does not need to be done at all?
What am I doing that can be done by somebody else?
What am I doing that only I can do?
Delegating responsibilities to those you trust would free you to focus on what you are best at. Promoting from within is a valuable tool for retaining and motivating your people. However, if current employees don't have the skills your business needs, don't hesitate to hire someone who does. It often makes sense to search for someone who can immediately add value to your management team as well as transfer some of his or her skills to others in your organization.
The Secret of Successful Delegation
Explain the task, tell your people what should be done, but don't tell
them how. "This is the secret of successful delegation. When you tell
somebody exactly how you want a task carried out, it removes any creativity. It becomes completely boring, there is no challenge and they do not have to develop in any capacity whatsoever.
Using the Skill/Will Matrix
If you assigned a task to someone and the job does not quite get done
well enough, one of the most likely reasons is that:
you have delegated the task to someone who is unwilling - or unable - to
complete the job, and have then remained relatively uninvolved or 'hands-off', or you may have been too directive or 'hands-on' with a capable person who was quite able to complete the assignment with little assistance from you; you just ended up demotivating him/her. Consequently, whether you are managing, or leading, or coaching,
it is critical to match your style of interaction with the coachee's readiness
for the task. Everyone knows about delegation. Most managers hear about it in the cradle as mother talks earnestly to the baby-sitter: "just enjoy the television ... this is what you do if ... if there is any trouble call me at ...";
people have been writing about it for nearly half a millennium; yet few
actually understand it. Delegation underpins a style of management which allows your staff to use and develop their skills and knowledge to the full potential. Without delegation, you lose their full value. As the ancient quotation above suggests, delegation is primarily about entrusting your authority to others. This means that they can act and initiate
independently; and that they assume responsibility with you for certain
tasks. If something goes wrong, you remain responsible since you are the
manager; the trick is to delegate in such a way that things get done but do not go (badly) wrong.
Objective
The objective of delegation is to get the job done by someone else. Not just the simple tasks of reading instructions and turning a lever, but also the decision making and changes which depend upon new information. With delegation, your staff have the authority to react to situations without referring back to you. If you tell the janitor to empty the bins on Tuesdays and Fridays, the bins will be emptied on Tuesdays and Fridays. If the bins overflow on Wednesday, they will be emptied on Friday. If instead you said to empty the bins as often as necessary, the janitor would decide how often and adapt to special circumstances. You might suggest a regular schedule (teach the janitor a little personal time management), but by leaving the decision up to the janitor you will apply his/her local knowledge to the problem. Consider this frankly: do you want to be an expert on bin emptying, can you construct an instruction to cover all possible contingencies? If not, delegate to someone who gets paid for it.
To enable someone else to do the job for you, you must ensure that:
extent of their discretion, and the sources of relevant information and
knowledge.
Information
Such a system can only operate successfully if the decision-makers (your
staff) have full and rapid access to the relevant information. This means that you must establish a system to enable the flow of information. This must at least include regular exchanges between your staff so that each is aware of what the others are doing. It should also include briefings by you on the information which you have received in your role as manager; since if you need to know this information to do your job, your staff will need to know also if they are to do your (delegated) job for you. One of the main claims being made for computerized information distribution is that it facilitates the rapid dissemination of information. Some protagonists even suggest that such systems will instigate changes in managerial power sharing rather than merely support them: that the "enknowledged" workforce will rise up, assume control and innovate spontaneously. You may not believe this vision, but you should understand the premise. If a manager restricts access to information, then only he/she is able to make decisions which rely upon that information; once that access is opened to many others, they too can make decisions - and challenge those of the manager according to additional criteria. The manager who fears this challenge
will never delegate effectively; the manager who recognizes that the staff may have additional experience and knowledge (and so may enhance the
decision-making process) will welcome their input; delegation ensures that the staff will practise decision-making and will feel that their views are welcome.
Effective control
One of the main phobias about delegation is that by giving others authority,
a manager loses control. This need not be the case. If you train your staff to apply the same criteria as you would yourself (by example and full explanations) then they will be exercising your control on you behalf. And since they will witness many more situations over which control may be exercised (you can't be in several places at once) then that control is exercised more diversely and more rapidly than you could exercise it by yourself. In engineering terms: if maintaining control is truly your concern, then you should distribute the control mechanisms to enable parallel and autonomous processing.
Staggered Development
To understand delegation, you really have to think about people. Delegation
cannot be viewed as an abstract technique, it depends upon individuals and
individual needs. Let us take a lowly member of staff who has little or no
knowledge about the job which needs to be done.
Do you say: "Jimmy, I want a draft tender for contract of the new Hydro
Powerstation on my desk by Friday"? No. Do you say: "Jimmy, Jennifer
used to do the tenders for me. Spend about an hour with her going over how she did them and try compiling one for the new Hydro Powerstation. She will help you for this one, but do come to me if she is busy with a client. I want a draft by Friday so that I can look over it with you"? Possibly. The key is to delegate gradually. If you present someone with a task which is daunting, one with which he/she does not feel able to cope, then the task will not be done and your staff will be severely demotivated. Instead you should build-up gradually; first a small task leading to a little development, then another small task which builds upon the first; when that is achieved, add another stage; and so on. This is the difference between asking people to scale a sheer wall, and providing them with a staircase. Each task delegated should have enough complexity to stretch that member of staff - but only a little. Jimmy needs to feel confident. He needs to believe that he will actually be able to achieve the task which has been given to him. This means that either he must have the sufficient knowledge, or he must know where to get it or where to get help. So, you must enable access to the necessary knowledge. If you hold that knowledge, make sure that Jimmy feels able to come to you; if someone
else holds the knowledge, make sure that they are prepared for Jimmy to come to them. Only if Jimmy is sure that support is available will he feel confident enough to undertake a new job. You need to feel confident in Jimmy: this means keeping an eye on him. It would be fatal to cast Jimmy adrift and expect him to make it to the shore: keep an eye on him, and a lifebelt handy. It is also a mistake to keep wandering up to Jimmy at odd moments and asking for progress reports: he will soon feel persecuted. Instead you must agree beforehand how often and when you actually need information and decide the reporting schedule at the onset. Jimmy will then expect these encounters and even feel encouraged by your continuing support; you will be able to check upon progress and even spur it on
a little. When you do talk to Jimmy about the project, you should avoid making decisions of which Jimmy is capable himself. The whole idea is for Jimmy to learn to take over and so he must be encouraged to do so. Of course, with you there to check his decisions, Jimmy will feel freer to do so. If Jimmy is wrong - tell him, and explain very carefully why. If Jimmy is nearly right - congratulate him, and suggest possible modifications; but, of course, leave Jimmy to decide. Finally, unless your solution has significant merits over Jimmy's, take his: it costs you little, yet rewards him much.
Constrained Availability
There is a danger with "open access" that you become too involved
with the task you had hoped to delegate. One successful strategy to avoid this is to formalize the manner in which these conversation take place. One
formalism is to allow only fixed, regular encounters (except for emergencies)
so that Jimmy has to think about issues and questions before raising them; you might even insist that he draw-up an agenda. A second formalism is to refuse to make a decision unless Jimmy has provided you with a clear statement of alternatives, pros and cons, and his recommendation. This is my favourite. It allows Jimmy to rehearse the full authority of decision making while secure in the knowledge that you will be there to check the outcome. Further, the insistence upon evaluation of alternatives promotes good decision making practices. If Jimmy is right, then Jimmy's confidence increases - if you disagree with Jimmy, he learns something new (provided you explain your criteria) and so his knowledge increases. Which ever way, he benefits; and the analysis is provided for you.
- Most commonly, it refers to a
programming language feature making use of the method lookup rules for
dispatching so-called self-calls as defined by Lieberman in his 1986 paper
"Using Prototypical Objects to Implement Shared Behavior in
Object-Oriented Systems". - In its original usage,
delegation refers to one object relying upon another to provide a
specified set of functionalities. In research, this is often referred to
as consultation or as aggregation in modeling.
management is the process of getting results accomplished through others. A manager should provide team members with the information they require to do a good job, communicating with them frequently, and giving them clear guidelines on the results that are expected.Further, managers must also take the "relationship responsibility" for those with whom they work.
Delegation is the preferred approach to managing and coaching
people who have high skill and high will to complete the specific task at hand.
Why Delegate?
At a certain point, there are just too many facets to running a
successful business to continue doing it alone. In an increasingly complex business environment, with all the trends affecting business today, such as
globalization, the information technology explosion, strategic alliances, increased mergers and acquisitions, heightened competition, and higher expectations of nearly every customer, it just isn't possible to still be that one person in control of everything. Bringing in others to manage is an absolute necessity for survival now. Owners and managers should concentrate on the activities they do that bring the most value to their organization. You must perform only "essential activities" that give the company its competitive advantage over other companies in the industry. Learn to do less and manage more.
The delegation task is in finding the right persons and giving them the
right work. The sheer volume of management responsibilities necessitates
delegation. Always drop unnecessary work altogether; concentrate only on the tasks that nobody else can do. Necessary tasks that can be done by others should be delegated.Often the need to delegate is sparked by rapid business expansion, particularly as a result of acquisition.
How To Delegate?
Resist the temptation to keep tasks to yourself as a means of control or
a demonstration of power. Be a leader rather than a
mentor.
The first step is to recognize when it is time to delegate. Then
determine what to delegate, how, and to whom. To help you define and allot tasks, including your own, ask yourself three of Peter Drucker's questions:
What am I doing that does not need to be done at all?
What am I doing that can be done by somebody else?
What am I doing that only I can do?
Delegating responsibilities to those you trust would free you to focus on what you are best at. Promoting from within is a valuable tool for retaining and motivating your people. However, if current employees don't have the skills your business needs, don't hesitate to hire someone who does. It often makes sense to search for someone who can immediately add value to your management team as well as transfer some of his or her skills to others in your organization.
The Secret of Successful Delegation
Explain the task, tell your people what should be done, but don't tell
them how. "This is the secret of successful delegation. When you tell
somebody exactly how you want a task carried out, it removes any creativity. It becomes completely boring, there is no challenge and they do not have to develop in any capacity whatsoever.
Using the Skill/Will Matrix
If you assigned a task to someone and the job does not quite get done
well enough, one of the most likely reasons is that:
you have delegated the task to someone who is unwilling - or unable - to
complete the job, and have then remained relatively uninvolved or 'hands-off', or you may have been too directive or 'hands-on' with a capable person who was quite able to complete the assignment with little assistance from you; you just ended up demotivating him/her. Consequently, whether you are managing, or leading, or coaching,
it is critical to match your style of interaction with the coachee's readiness
for the task. Everyone knows about delegation. Most managers hear about it in the cradle as mother talks earnestly to the baby-sitter: "just enjoy the television ... this is what you do if ... if there is any trouble call me at ...";
people have been writing about it for nearly half a millennium; yet few
actually understand it. Delegation underpins a style of management which allows your staff to use and develop their skills and knowledge to the full potential. Without delegation, you lose their full value. As the ancient quotation above suggests, delegation is primarily about entrusting your authority to others. This means that they can act and initiate
independently; and that they assume responsibility with you for certain
tasks. If something goes wrong, you remain responsible since you are the
manager; the trick is to delegate in such a way that things get done but do not go (badly) wrong.
Objective
The objective of delegation is to get the job done by someone else. Not just the simple tasks of reading instructions and turning a lever, but also the decision making and changes which depend upon new information. With delegation, your staff have the authority to react to situations without referring back to you. If you tell the janitor to empty the bins on Tuesdays and Fridays, the bins will be emptied on Tuesdays and Fridays. If the bins overflow on Wednesday, they will be emptied on Friday. If instead you said to empty the bins as often as necessary, the janitor would decide how often and adapt to special circumstances. You might suggest a regular schedule (teach the janitor a little personal time management), but by leaving the decision up to the janitor you will apply his/her local knowledge to the problem. Consider this frankly: do you want to be an expert on bin emptying, can you construct an instruction to cover all possible contingencies? If not, delegate to someone who gets paid for it.
To enable someone else to do the job for you, you must ensure that:
- they know what you want
- they have the authority to
achieve it - they know how to do it.
extent of their discretion, and the sources of relevant information and
knowledge.
Information
Such a system can only operate successfully if the decision-makers (your
staff) have full and rapid access to the relevant information. This means that you must establish a system to enable the flow of information. This must at least include regular exchanges between your staff so that each is aware of what the others are doing. It should also include briefings by you on the information which you have received in your role as manager; since if you need to know this information to do your job, your staff will need to know also if they are to do your (delegated) job for you. One of the main claims being made for computerized information distribution is that it facilitates the rapid dissemination of information. Some protagonists even suggest that such systems will instigate changes in managerial power sharing rather than merely support them: that the "enknowledged" workforce will rise up, assume control and innovate spontaneously. You may not believe this vision, but you should understand the premise. If a manager restricts access to information, then only he/she is able to make decisions which rely upon that information; once that access is opened to many others, they too can make decisions - and challenge those of the manager according to additional criteria. The manager who fears this challenge
will never delegate effectively; the manager who recognizes that the staff may have additional experience and knowledge (and so may enhance the
decision-making process) will welcome their input; delegation ensures that the staff will practise decision-making and will feel that their views are welcome.
Effective control
One of the main phobias about delegation is that by giving others authority,
a manager loses control. This need not be the case. If you train your staff to apply the same criteria as you would yourself (by example and full explanations) then they will be exercising your control on you behalf. And since they will witness many more situations over which control may be exercised (you can't be in several places at once) then that control is exercised more diversely and more rapidly than you could exercise it by yourself. In engineering terms: if maintaining control is truly your concern, then you should distribute the control mechanisms to enable parallel and autonomous processing.
Staggered Development
To understand delegation, you really have to think about people. Delegation
cannot be viewed as an abstract technique, it depends upon individuals and
individual needs. Let us take a lowly member of staff who has little or no
knowledge about the job which needs to be done.
Do you say: "Jimmy, I want a draft tender for contract of the new Hydro
Powerstation on my desk by Friday"? No. Do you say: "Jimmy, Jennifer
used to do the tenders for me. Spend about an hour with her going over how she did them and try compiling one for the new Hydro Powerstation. She will help you for this one, but do come to me if she is busy with a client. I want a draft by Friday so that I can look over it with you"? Possibly. The key is to delegate gradually. If you present someone with a task which is daunting, one with which he/she does not feel able to cope, then the task will not be done and your staff will be severely demotivated. Instead you should build-up gradually; first a small task leading to a little development, then another small task which builds upon the first; when that is achieved, add another stage; and so on. This is the difference between asking people to scale a sheer wall, and providing them with a staircase. Each task delegated should have enough complexity to stretch that member of staff - but only a little. Jimmy needs to feel confident. He needs to believe that he will actually be able to achieve the task which has been given to him. This means that either he must have the sufficient knowledge, or he must know where to get it or where to get help. So, you must enable access to the necessary knowledge. If you hold that knowledge, make sure that Jimmy feels able to come to you; if someone
else holds the knowledge, make sure that they are prepared for Jimmy to come to them. Only if Jimmy is sure that support is available will he feel confident enough to undertake a new job. You need to feel confident in Jimmy: this means keeping an eye on him. It would be fatal to cast Jimmy adrift and expect him to make it to the shore: keep an eye on him, and a lifebelt handy. It is also a mistake to keep wandering up to Jimmy at odd moments and asking for progress reports: he will soon feel persecuted. Instead you must agree beforehand how often and when you actually need information and decide the reporting schedule at the onset. Jimmy will then expect these encounters and even feel encouraged by your continuing support; you will be able to check upon progress and even spur it on
a little. When you do talk to Jimmy about the project, you should avoid making decisions of which Jimmy is capable himself. The whole idea is for Jimmy to learn to take over and so he must be encouraged to do so. Of course, with you there to check his decisions, Jimmy will feel freer to do so. If Jimmy is wrong - tell him, and explain very carefully why. If Jimmy is nearly right - congratulate him, and suggest possible modifications; but, of course, leave Jimmy to decide. Finally, unless your solution has significant merits over Jimmy's, take his: it costs you little, yet rewards him much.
Constrained Availability
There is a danger with "open access" that you become too involved
with the task you had hoped to delegate. One successful strategy to avoid this is to formalize the manner in which these conversation take place. One
formalism is to allow only fixed, regular encounters (except for emergencies)
so that Jimmy has to think about issues and questions before raising them; you might even insist that he draw-up an agenda. A second formalism is to refuse to make a decision unless Jimmy has provided you with a clear statement of alternatives, pros and cons, and his recommendation. This is my favourite. It allows Jimmy to rehearse the full authority of decision making while secure in the knowledge that you will be there to check the outcome. Further, the insistence upon evaluation of alternatives promotes good decision making practices. If Jimmy is right, then Jimmy's confidence increases - if you disagree with Jimmy, he learns something new (provided you explain your criteria) and so his knowledge increases. Which ever way, he benefits; and the analysis is provided for you.
Sat Apr 08, 2023 8:31 am by Dr Abdul Aziz Awan
» Video for our MPH colleagues. Must watch
Sun Aug 07, 2022 11:56 pm by The Saint
» Salam
Sun Jan 31, 2021 7:40 am by mr dentist
» Feeling Sad
Tue Feb 04, 2020 8:27 pm by mr dentist
» Look here. Its 2020 and this is what we found
Mon Jan 27, 2020 7:23 am by izzatullah
» Sad News
Fri Jan 11, 2019 6:17 am by ameen
» Pakistan Demographic Profile 2018
Fri May 18, 2018 9:42 am by Dr Abdul Aziz Awan
» Good evening all fellows
Wed Apr 25, 2018 10:16 am by Dr Abdul Aziz Awan
» Urdu Poetry
Sat Apr 04, 2015 12:28 pm by Dr Abdul Aziz Awan