Delegating, an art in itself.
How many internal conflicts arise when we are not clear about who is responsible, and at what level each member of the activities or tasks is responsible, personally and professionally? In my case, more conflicts than I thought.
Part of the problem I have as a team leader is not delegating efficiently. At the beginning of the year, I believed that I should empower everyone, expecting everyone to do the same as me without considering whether they were prepared or interested in taking those responsibilities. That led to a rework for all of us, not having clear indications, deadlines, and delivery dates. It became a chain of misunderstandings that became more problems to solve at the end of the day.
I began the search to learn how to delegate; I started reflecting on how bad I was doing, discovered Delegation Poker, and understood why I was making mistakes.
Little by little, I discovered that not effectively delegating at work led me to a rework spiral. Therefore, I had to spend more time solving even after hours, directly impacting my home, arriving tired and saturated with problems.
Delegation Poker’s objective is to learn to delegate decisions and tasks within the team in controlled environments, learn to collaborate, and a space to open conversations and discussions about who should do what and to what level. Encourage commitment through self-organization and self-regulation.
If you want to know more about this practice, I invite you to learn more from the Management 3.0 site https://management30.com/practice/delegation-poker/.
In this particular case, I used Delegation Poker to clarify responsibilities and delegation levels to a team to encourage commitment through self-organization.
The 7 Levels of Delegation
Delegation Poker has seven levels of delegation. Each tag provides a set of limits to encourage commitment from each member and clarifies how far you can delegate with the team.
- Tell: I will tell them.
- Sell: I will try and sell it to them.
- Consult: I will consult and then decide.
- Agree: We will agree together.
- Advice: I will advise, but they decide
- Inquire: I will inquire after they decide.
- Delegate: I will fully delegate
I noticed that one of the teams had communication problems and poor performance. The scrum master had several observations about the role of each team member. So we decided to implement the dynamic with them.
First, we carry out a previous practice, and each team member designed their Work Profile. You can explore this practice at https://management30.com/practice/work-profiles/.
The goal of each creating a work profile was to briefly describe their set of services within the context of the team’s tasks, a way of knowing their aspirations within the group.
Second, we identified a list of tasks and deadlines that were required to complete within the team. When I delegate, I discovered that I give instruction, but I didn’t give the complementary information, such as the deadline or responsible for said task. So this situation confuses my team.
We grouped the similar task. We categorized in two tracks: The jobs related to the Design System and jobs related to the business as usual of the App; for each item on the list, each chose the card with the desired level of delegation. In this way, we were generating agreements of the responsibilities for general items, intending to have clear expectations and adequate performance to grow professionally and meet the expected results with time.
In the end, the discover the preferences of everyone when I was delegating some task. The board has divided into two tracks: the Design System´s implementation and the Business as Usual tasks.
I understood that each person assigned to a particular job requires a different delegation level and is conditioned by their experience in carrying out that task and their personality.
For example, Lili feels more comfortable requesting the delegation of all tasks involved in the Design System. She had four years in the company, so she feels secure and confident with the seventh level. Like a lead, I feel comfortable, and of course, I will fully delegate to her.
On the other hand, Daniela had only one year at the company, so she feels more comfortable with the fourth level. She prefers we review together her assignations and agree before starting some task.
So this pattern, repeat frequently in the team, some members will be more comfortable people at level 4 (Agree: We will agree together) the delivery times, working, etc. Others will feel more comfortable at level 6 (Inquire: I will inquire after they decide) or status 7 (Delegate: I will fully delegate) because their ability and experience have prepared them to take that challenge. At the end of the dynamic, we had a more empowered team.
As a facilitator, I learned that I need to clarify each member’s roles, activities and deadlines to improve my team’s organization and performance. With this practice, I have an overview to be able to delegate activities within the group. That allows me to know who I can fully empower and who I should accompany in the process to improve results. With this map, I was able to generate a strategy to attend each one within the team. I avoid misunderstandings in the team because I know what they expect from me when delegating, and I know what to expect from their performance. This exercise has helped me foster a self-organized team.
My next experiment will be to apply this technique for each work cell with low performance into the team to identify the delegation-level that I can grant and what they want to accept. Before starting the dynamic, I advise you to identify the most difficult tasks with your team to delegate efficiently.
I invite you to do this practice in all areas where you interact with work teams, and the responsibilities and level of involvement are not clear. You will discover how some conflicts are straightforward to resolve if you take the time to listen to their needs at the moment to face a challenge.
