Developing leaders – When should you delegate?

One of the best bits of advice I received when I first became a manager was to “delegate a task when your team member is 70% as good at it as you are, not 99%.”
Many times, people are promoted to management positions because of their strong performance as individual contributors, but then they’re shocked to learn that a whole separate set of skills is required to succeed in their new role. Delegation is high on this list of new skills.
Delegation means handing off tasks for someone else to do them. A common mistake is to only hand off a task when the team member is as good as you are at it. This is a trap! While it may seem like a good idea to protect the quality of the task, it doesn’t work in practice – here's why:
First, if you continue to perform the individual contributor tasks, you won’t have sufficient time to perform your new manager tasks (the one’s you’re being measured on) and your performance will suffer.
Second, a major part of your managerial assignment is to develop your team members. They will learn best by doing – you have to let them try. Most people will “step up” in the face of a new challenge. By delegating a task you’re great at, you challenge the team member to learn. Sure, they’ll make some mistakes the first few times, but you’ll be there to course-correct and mentor.
Importantly, by handing off some of your old responsibilities in this way, your time will be freed up to learn the new tasks and skills that will enhance your career growth.
Delegating is a skill. It requires a certain amount of trust in your team members and a certain amount of faith that they’ll be able to pick up the ball and run with it. By expanding their skills, you improve the versatility and performance of your team (and as a manger, the performance of your team is what you are being measured on) and you improve your capacity to learn and to move on to bigger and better things.
Over the years we’ve been exposed to Six Sigma, Juran, Deming PDCA, 8D, Dale Carnegie, A3, Shainin, and more. Each technique works pretty well, and has been demonstrated many times in a wide variety of industries and circumstances. At the core they are all essentially the same!
Each approach relies on an underlying logical flow that goes like this: [a] make sure the problem is clearly defined; [b] be open to all sources of information; [c] vet the information for relevance and accuracy; [d] use the process of elimination to narrow down all possible causes to the most likely few; [e] prove which of the suspects is really the cause of the issue; [f] generate a number of potential solutions; [g] evaluate the effectiveness, feasibility and risk of the potential solutions; [h] implement the winning solution(s); and [i] take steps to make sure your solution(s) don’t unravel in the future.
The differences between the paradigms resides in supplementary steps and toolkits. For example, 8D contains the important “In
Your primary role as a manager is to ensure your team’s success. Internalize this. Make sure your team members know this. Build an environment of trust and collaboration. A direct report of mine would frequently leave me out of the loop as problems escalated, preferring instead to “work harder”. It was clear that he felt uncomfortable delivering bad news to me (his boss) when things were not going according to plan. Let me tell you the rest of the story.
