All our newsletters are copyrighted but we encourage you
to share them with others.
If you use the information, please let us know and cite us as the source.
Thank you.
Copyright 1998 AXIS Performance Advisors, Inc.
Empowerment has definitely become the most overused buzz word of the nineties.
The literature has everyone convinced of our
obligation to empower our employees. While we at AXIS believe that empowering
front-line employees to work in
unencumbered service to your customers is generally a good thing, empowering
employees with every responsibility that comes
along probably doesn't make sense. There needs to be a reason to hand off
a task; one that has the needs of the business at its
foundation.
So that leaves leaders wondering, "When is it appropriate and useful
to empower employees?" We'd like to provide the
following short guide to help you answer this question.
Very broadly speaking, a manager's job is to see to it that "the work
gets done." In the old days that meant doing all the
planning and making all the decisions. Today's manager has more options:
she may make all the decisions and do the work
herself, or she may delegate work to employees, or she may empower employees
to make the decisions and do the job
themselves. Each option carries with it certain assumptions about responsibility,
authority and accountability as indicated in
the chart below. Which option you choose will depend on the situation, but
generally consider these issues.
Responsibility:
the onus of doing the task. The person with responsibility for a task is
the one who's hands actually
get dirty doing it.
Authority: the
power to make important decisions about the task like how and when it gets
done and what resources
will be allocated to doing it. Having
authority for a task implies that you have ultimate control over it and
its
outcome.
Accountability:
living with the natural and logical consequences of the results of
the task. This implies that you are
directly linked to the results of the
task ? if something goes wrong, you fix it; if it goes very right, you take
a bow.
| If the manager chooses to do it herself, | then she has all the authority, responsibility, and accountability | and the employee has the possibility of providing input (if the manager asks) |
| If the manager chooses to delegate, | then she has some of the responsibility, and all of the authority and accountability | and the employee has most of the responsibility, but little or no authority and no accountability |
| If the manager chooses to empower, | then she has some share of the accountability | and the employee has all of the responsibility and authority and most of the accountability |
While for most busy managers this option may seem ludicrous, it is surprising
how many managers actually end up doing a task
themselves rather than trust it to another person. The advantage of doing
it yourself is that you have ultimate control in how
and when it gets done. While clearly you can't do everything yourself, it
still may be appropriate to maintain ownership of
certain tasks, for example, tasks that truly require the perspective of
a manager's position (perhaps long-range planning) or
the connections and relationships that the position allows (e.g., negotiating
contracts with unions or vendors).
We often hear managers lament that by the time they teach someone how
to do a task, they could have done it twice
themselves. And who has time for that! Clearly, unless there are other compelling
reasons to hand them off, you should
probably think twice about empowering people to do infrequently performed
tasks.
Some people equate delegation with empowerment. In our minds there is a
significant distinction. When a manager delegates,
she still maintains ownership of the activity. It's as if she is saying,
"This is my responsibility, but I simply don't have
enough hands to do it." Delegating means that she enlists the "help"
of others to get a job done, but takes responsibility for
how and when it happens.
The advantage is that the manager still has a significant amount of control
over the job. The disadvantage is that while
there is some benefit to having an extra pair of hands, it generally does
not save much time in the end because of all the
"supervision" required to tell someone else how to do your job.
Managers most often use delegation in situations where they are
still being held ultimately accountable for an outcome, and this makes sense.
It is why we think long and hard before giving
our teenagers the keys to the car ? after all, who ultimately is liable
for the actions of minors?
Empowerment implies a complete hand-off of responsibility, authority and
at least some, if not all, accountability for a task.
Empowerment is an appropriate option when:
1. You want employees to act
like owners, taking responsibility for the health of the business
2. Someone less expensive than
a manager could do the job competently, perhaps with
a little coaching
3. Someone besides the manager
is in a better position because they are closer to the situation,
have more expertise, have more time, or could do it more efficiently
4. There is an opportunity to
use empowerment as a development opportunity for an employee
When it is done well, the advantages are many: greater productivity,
higher quality, increased customer and employee
satisfaction. If there is a down side, it is the increased risk that ensues
when more people have decision authority. This risk
can be greatly decreased, however, with a proper "hand-off" process.
In order to successfully empower employees, you need to commit to a thoughtful
and thorough "hand-off" process. Use the steps
below to help you prepare an employee or a team for a new responsibility.
The hardest part of this step will be remembering what it was like to
do the task for the first time. You will need to make
explicit all those steps or tricks that have become automatic for you. Try
mapping out all the steps, decision points, etc. that
you go through when you perform the task. Have someone else who knows the
task check it over to be sure it is complete.
Another part of defining the task is clarifying the performance standards.
This is critical information. Your employees will
want to know what a good job should look like. Sometimes it is easier to
identify the standards by asking what an
unacceptable job would look like and using that to define your minimum standards.
Lastly think through what resources your employees will be need to perform
the task. How much time should they allocate to
doing it? (Remember to allow for their learning curve ? they won't be as
fast you are at first). Will they need any equipment,
special information, references or job aids, etc.
Once you know what the task is, think about the best way for someone
to learn how to do it. Design some activities that will
allow them the opportunity to practice doing it before they "go live"
and have to do it for real.
You should also consider how the learning/training will occur. Are you the
best person to teach them? Would it be more
effective or efficient for them to get formal training? How soon can the
training take place and how long will it be before they
are ready to take the task on officially?
With some tasks the hand-off will be quick and all at once. For others
you may want to ease employees into it to build both
your and the employees' confidence that they can do it successfully. Consider
these five options below for a more gradual
hand-off:
1. Watch me?The manager does the
task and the employee watches or provides input
(this may be
part of the training).
2. Do it together?The manager and employee
do the task together sharing
the responsibility
and control.
3. You try?The employee does the job,
but under the manager's supervision.
4. Let me check it?You let the employee
perform the task, but review the end product
and provide
feedback before it "goes out the door."
5. Go for it?The employee goes solo.
Whether you do a gradual or immediate hand-off (or anything in-between),
you will need to clarify the boundaries of
authority that go with the task as well as review the consequences that
are connected with the results ? both good and bad.
Don't let an employee operate under any false assumptions or you both may
get some rude surprises.
We knew a manager whose team members believed that he was arbitrarily
holding on to all the real control in their
department. We knew the manager to be quite empowering and had given his
team a good deal of authority over the months.
When we asked the team why they felt this way about him, they said it was
because he had denied their request to take on a
certain responsibility. When we later asked the manager about it, he smiled
and explained what had happened. He said the
task they asked for was highly dependent on a long and trusting relationship
he had built with their board of directors. That,
and the legal knowledge the task required, made it inappropriate and risky
for the team to take on. We recognized his logic
and realized that he had simply neglected to share his rationale with the
team, leaving them to form their own assumptions
about his motives.
Empowerment will only work if both sides have the opportunity to share and
address any concerns they may be harboring.
Managers should ask: "Is there anything that worries me about handing
off this responsibility? What would the employee
need to do to allay my fears?" They should convey their honest answers
to these questions to their teams so that they have a
chance to understand and possibly respond.
Similarly employees should ask themselves: "Is there anything that
worries us about taking on this responsibility? What can
our manager do to make us more comfortable and confident about taking on
the job?"
This last step rounds out the negotiation process and ensures that empowerment
is handled responsibly and with success for
everyone in mind.