.
We previously discussed the advantages of stewardship delegation and some of the specific behaviors and practices that make it work. This time we’ll dig a little deeper into the recipe for delegation success.
By definition, accountability is at the core of stewardship delegation.
You’ll notice here that these steps to stewardship delegation involve delegating the assignment, not delegating the methods.
It’s important to come to agreement on the desired outcomes and to share a common understanding and commitment regarding the linkages between the work and its effect on the stakeholders being served (other coworkers, customers, clients, etc.).
Remember the importance of reaching a clear, up-front mutual understanding and commitment regarding:
1. desired results or outcomes,
2. guidelines,
3. resources,
4. accountability, and
5. linkages.
In doing this, you enter into a kind of psychological contract with the steward. Then the temptation to “Micromanage” (regardless of how you might define it) greatly diminishes. That’s because “micromanaging” often takes the form of belatedly trying to clarify expectations. When you do it in advance and there is a clear, up- front mutual understanding and commitment regarding expectations, your comfort level rises, and the other person’s comfort and competence are enhanced.
By the way, note the word mutual. Expectations and understandings should be shared. This implies that you can and should initiate a discussion on these five items even when you are the person who is receiving an assignment. It’s not disrespectful to ask for clarity on an assignment.
Levels of Initiative
I mentioned earlier that the expected levels of initiative should be discussed in the initial stewardship interview. Stewardship delegation actually helps people develop initiative.
Ideally, this development process moves them through six levels or stages:
1. The first level of initiative is when the worker waits for instruction.
2. At the next level of initiative, the worker asks what to do.
3. As the worker gains competence and confidence, he or she recommends what should be done.
4. Upon gaining additional experience, the worker acts independently but reports immediately to the supervising leader.
5. The next level is when the worker acts independently and reports routinely.
6. Finally, the worker simply does it and moves on to another part of his assignment.
Lack of mutual understanding on the expected levels of initiative is probably the most common cause for failure in a stewardship assignment. For many people, a natural inclination (because of humility or lack of confidence or a fear of overstepping their authority) is to adopt a lower level of initiative than is necessary.
Remember: The effective leader takes the time to teach the steward and to clarify expectations. The leader should encourage the steward to lean toward initiative rather than toward inertia. After all, it’s easier to tame a tiger than to motivate a turtle. And if the leader does not initiate an early and specific discussion leading to an agreement on mutual expectations, the person receiving the assignment should initiate the discussion.
With this careful attention to mutual expectations, can you see how the steward is placed on a path to success? At the very beginning, he is given the opportunity to ask questions and to express himself regarding expectations for his new assignment. He is given much, much more than a handshake and good wishes. He receives a motivating mission, complete with specifics on (1) desired results, (2) guidelines, (3) resources, (4) accountability, (5) linkages and (6) levels of initiative. He can now proceed with confidence.
“But wait a minute,” you may be thinking. “These are helpful principles and they certainly apply in some cases. But I’m working with people who have a wide range of experience. They have many different sets of skills. Some of them are already highly committed, while others clearly need motivating. How can I lead such people with one set of principles?”
That’s the very point! True principles of delegation apply to every situation.
Please note: I’m not suggesting that you apply the principles in a “cookie cutter” fashion, treating every individual precisely the same. In fact, an important principle to remember is that there is nothing as unequal as the equal treatment of unequals. We must use these timeless principles to address the individual and personal needs of each person we are charged to lead. This principle of delegation combined with trust is vital in raising responsible and accountable workers.
Situational Leadership
Like any good physician, the effective leader diagnoses before he prescribes. He carefully considers the situation at hand—the situation regarding the challenges of the work to be accomplished and the situation regarding the ability and readiness of the person being asked to do the work. In this sense, one size does not fit all.
Situational leadership honors the differences in people and accelerates the learning and growth of everyone involved. It also helps ensure that the work is accomplished in a way that meets expectations.
.
Most people have peak performance potential. You just need to know “where they’re coming from” and meet them there. With situational leadership you are able to “teach the one” by applying a leadership style that meets the current needs of the person you want to bless.
One such leadership style is Directing. This means you provide specific instructions and closely supervise task accomplishment.
With a Coaching leadership style, you continue to direct and closely supervise task accomplishment. You also explain your reasons for suggesting certain things, you solicit suggestions from the person you’re leading, and you honestly compliment progress.
In the Supporting leadership style, you help and support the steward’s efforts and you share responsibility for decision making.
Finally, in the Delegating leadership style, you turn over to the steward the responsibility for decision making and problem solving.
Bear in mind, there is no one best leadership style. The issue here is situational leader- ship. In other words, deciding which style is most appropriate for a given situation.
Another important thing to remember about situational leadership is that a person’s performance or achievement involves two key ingredients: competence and commitment. Competence is a combination of knowledge and skills. These can be gained from education, training, coaching, and/or experience. Commitment is a combination of conversion, confidence, and motivation. Confidence is a measure of a person’s self-assuredness, a feeling of being able to do something well without much supervision. Motivation is a person’s interest in and enthusiasm for doing something well.
As you can see, people who are at different development levels need to be treated differently. There’s nothing negative about being at a lower level of development. In reality, all of us have been at a low level of development at some time or another.
So, given these two ideas—leadership styles and development levels—consider this graphic. The left side of the graphic will help you determine the leadership needs of the steward you want to develop. Remember, different people with different needs. If you try to apply precisely the same leadership style to every situation, neither you nor the people to whom you’re delegating will be satisfied by the results.
The right side of the graphic shows the leadership style that most appropriately helps people at the different development level.
An important purpose of your leadership, of course, is to help people progress to higher levels of development. When they do, they will need a different leadership style. Again, that’s what situational means. As people grow in capacity, they will receive other opportunities to serve. And every situation will be, well, situational, and will require a leadership style suited to the circumstance.
Questions of Conscience
1. Do I genuinely try to “teach the one” with every individual I lead?
2. Do I carefully consider individual differences so I can provide the most appropriate and timely assistance?
3. Am I willing to “let go” and appropriately allow others to take on responsibilities that I’m tempted to keep for myself?
4. Do I reach clear, up-front mutual understanding and commitment regarding expectations on assignments I delegate?
5. Do I give people sufficient “elbow room” to make decisions required by their assignments?
6. Do I provide praise and affirmation to help people increase in desire to do better?
7. Do I establish appropriate check points and follow-up procedures so people will return and report?
8. Am I careful to use stewardship delegation to develop people rather than merely to load them up with work?
9. As a leader, do I constantly remember that I am a servant?
Consider one of the stewardship delegation situations in which you are involved—either as the person delegating or as the one receiving an assignment. Now consider the definition of effective stewardship delegation: A clear, up-front, mutual understanding and commitment regarding expectations.
To what extent can your stewardship delegation situation(s) benefit from operationalizing this definition?
Try it. You’ll like the result.
