Tag Archive for: CSLDP Module 9

Delegating work and tasks to your team members is one of the most necessary and important skills of leadership. It also remains one of the most challenging for many new and experienced managers.

However, there are several things you can do to develop this skill.

In order to free up space to be more strategic, have a greater impact, be more efficient, and achieve work/life balance, delegating appropriate tasks to others is necessary and even required for managers today. This can feel risky – especially if the leader is high controlling, is a perfectionist, or has a heavy workload.

CoachStation: Leadership and Delegating

Photo by Dylan Gillis on Unsplash

The art and science of delegating to others begins with your own sense of comfort in releasing responsibility of what you control. Many managers struggle with this. Delegation and control are common topics with my coaching clients. They recognise the importance of delegation and how it can serve them, but some still struggle with letting go.

Effective leaders who climb the corporate ladder are skilled at delegating and developing people. (1)

The first step is to define what tasks are to be delegated. This begins with your ability to prioritise. Using the decision matrix below, you can separate your actions based on four possibilities.

  1. Urgent and important (tasks you will do immediately).
  2. Important, but not urgent (tasks you will schedule to do later).
  3. Urgent, but not important (tasks you will delegate to someone else).
  4. Neither urgent nor important (tasks that you will eliminate).

The great thing about this matrix is that it can be used for broad productivity plans (“How should I spend my time each week?”) and for smaller, daily plans (“What should I do today?”). (2)

This process is easier if you learn to apply conscious and deliberate decision-making.

I often say to clients, “if you don’t control things, they will control you”. This tool may provide an opportunity to improve. Prioritising tasks by urgency and importance results in 4 quadrants with different work strategies.(3)

 

The most effective leaders and people schedule time for important, less-urgent tasks and activities. As the video explains, the less-important, but urgent tasks can often be delegated. It is not about being obsessive, but rather ensuring the things that matter the most actually occur. Once priorities have been established, one of the most effective methods of aligning actions with team member is via 1:1’s.

Related: Management – Communication and Accountability In One-On-Ones

Formalising expectations and ensuring that real understanding exists regarding the work and tasks required is a key component of an effective 1:1. Good leaders see this time as an investment not a cost, therefore rarely compromise on making the most of the opportunity.

Quite simply, with the pace and expectations of modern organisations, if it’s not scheduled it rarely happens.

I have noticed in recent years when coaching and mentoring that there is a relatively consistent behavioural trend in those who delegate least often. The unwillingness or lack of awareness to delegate to others often stems from a lack of the managers self-confidence. This is also regularly displayed by those managers who also struggle with the idea of team members working remotely.

It is difficult to learn to lead well and trust others if you don’t trust yourself.

One of the most difficult transitions for leaders to make is the shift from doing to leading. There’s a psychological shift to focus your attention on areas that are vital to the company and become less involved in the daily tasks. That shift can bring about fear. “What will happen if I let go and delegate that responsibility? Will I be able to make the transition to my new role and focus? Will I be seen as less vital if I delegate certain tasks? No one can do it as good as me.” It’s a leader’s responsibility to focus on the success of their employees.

You retain your top talent by keeping your employees engaged, empowered and letting them develop their skills to become leaders. A leader’s second responsibility is to determine priorities. Third is to address projects. (4)

Often leaders delegate tasks when they should be delegating authority. If you delegate tasks, you get followers. If you delegate authority, you get leaders.

Craig Groeschel

A recent Forbes article asks a great question, “How do you know if you need to delegate more?”

  • Red flag No. 1: You say things like, “I’m overwhelmed. I get sucked into too many meetings,” or “I’m drained by all of the decisions that I have to make.”
  • Red flag No. 2: Your ability to unplug can only be measured in hours, not days or weeks.
  • Red flag No. 3: You don’t delegate a task because a portion of the process is complex or has exceptions.
  • Red flag No. 4: You once tried to delegate a responsibility and it didn’t go well, so you took the task back.
  • Reg flag No. 5: You find yourself stuck in a decision bottleneck, leading to inaction on many fronts.
  • Red flag No. 6: You aren’t happy or fulfilled at work.
  • Red flag No. 7: You claim you don’t have time to delegate or train someone. (4)

As a new manager you can get away with holding on to work.

Peers and bosses may even admire your willingness to keep “rolling up your sleeves” to execute tactical assignments. But as your responsibilities become more complex, the difference between an effective leader and a super-sized individual contributor with a leader’s title is painfully evident.

In the short term you may have the stamina to get up earlier, stay later, and out-work the demands you face. But the inverse equation of shrinking resources and increasing demands will eventually catch up to you, and at that point how you involve others sets the ceiling of your leadership impact. The upper limit of what’s possible will increase only with each collaborator you empower to contribute their best work to your shared priorities. Likewise, your power decreases with every initiative you unnecessarily hold on to. (5)

The irony of poor delegating is that it serves no-one well.

The manager is most often overwhelmed and performing poorly; team members can easily become bored and work becomes repetitious; trust and relationships are diminished; skills, capability and competence don’t grow; confidence in self and in others is not built and can in fact, be reduced; and, results are being limited, amongst other impacts.

The opposite is just as true. Through effective delegation, real opportunity to engage your team members and positively influence results can be gained. The challenge: if you improve your delegating capability, would you become an even better leader? It’s always a choice.

Keep growing and enjoying!

Resources:

(1) 7 Tips for Letting Go as a Manager: Blanchard LeaderChat

(2) How to be More Productive and Eliminate Time Wasting Activities by Using the “Eisenhower Box”

(3) Introducing the Eisenhower Matrix

(4) Great Leaders Perfect The Art Of Delegation: Forbes

(5) To Be a Great Leader, You Have to Learn How to Delegate Well: HBR

 

 

 

Are you someone who is described as action-oriented?

Do you assess the many possible alternatives and options before ultimately taking action? 

I consider that one of the most beneficial aspects of good leadership is the ability (and willingness!) to assess options quickly and efficiently and guide your team through to completion. Knowing what the most appropriate and beneficial action is can be difficult, however this model may help.
Passively waiting for others to make necessary decisions and take steps to meet a need, adds little value to your organisation and others perception of yourself.

Action matters in business!

Consciously considering the alternatives and understanding the organisational culture, potential barriers and existing situations provides the most likely scenario for success.
CoachStation Possibilities & Action Model
Additionally, the stages or steps that I consider to be the difference between successful decision-making and leadership effectiveness compared to less successful processes are:

  • Understanding the issue to be solved
  • Considering the options
  • Assessing possible outcomes
  • Narrowing the options to the clear few that add greatest benefit
  • Identifying a single response and doing something with it.

After recently being asked by one of my clients what the best way to make decisions is, I developed the concept above. I hope that it assists others to understand the steps necessary to remove the feeling of being overwhelmed, as was the case for my client. He sensed that there was a better way than ‘blind hope’, however was unable to work through the many possibilities to identify the few options that could be actioned.

The ‘CoachStation Possibilities/Action’ model works best when working through and considering all of the complementary and competing priorities. The challenge is to be targeted and specific at all stages of the process. The behaviours that can maximise the impact and benefit incorporate:

    • Full understanding of the problem in the first place.
    • Clarity about the question you are attempting to answer. It is difficult to provide an answer to a question that has not been asked, acknowledged or understood.
    • Consideration and assessment of the many alternatives (that time and common-sense allow). Don’t take the first option that comes to mind, without investigating its potential impact, value or outcomes and measuring it against other options. Assess the many to find the few!
    • A process that can identify the one, most beneficial action that is most likely to provide the best result or success. Success should be measured against your original assessment of the problem or question to be resolved. Using a ‘shotgun approach’, where many actions are taken in the hope that one of them suits the need is time-consuming, costly, disheartening and displays poor decision-making capability.
    • Having a reasonably clear view of what success would look like if the result intended was achieved. This requires a degree of forethought and progressive thinking, however remains one of the biggest gaps in decision making in my experience.

Let me know your questions, thoughts or successes related to decision-making and taking action. I would love to hear your stories.

Do you truly understand the difference between strategic and tactical thinking and application?

If so, do you understand enough about the similarities and differences to create aligned goals, apply meaningful actions and ensure that one leads effortlessly to the other?

Many a plan or process has failed due to a lack of clear direction and early identification of the problem to be solved, leading to a poor concept of the strategies required.

Leadership and Strategic Thinking
The subject of strategy is vast and complex. This blog highlights that there is power in understanding what strategic thinking is and its necessary alignment to the tactical tasks and practical choices we make every day. In this instance, a useful definition of strategy is, “A word of military origin (which) refers to a plan of action designed to achieve a particular goal. In military usage strategy is distinct from tactics, which are concerned with the conduct of an engagement, while strategy is concerned with how different engagements are linked” (1).

This is a relevant point – although business is obviously different to the military, the context of the definition has significance, particularly the point that strategy refers to the links between leadership, different engagements (military) and actions/tasks (business).

I was working with someone recently who engaged me to assist with his preparation for an interview for a more senior leadership position. The conversation went well and I was able to offer him several suggestions and concepts designed to stretch his thinking, to be better prepared for the interview and importantly, a plan for the role, if successful.

Whilst we were talking however, a concept became much clearer to me. In my colleagues case he was able to talk to many relevant, tactical initiatives and actions that could be applied in his first three months. In contrast, his strategic assessment and context was not as strong and we spent much of the session focusing on this subject. In essence, I was asking whether he had an understanding of the plan of action for what he would be trying to achieve and why these points were of core focus.
Strategic Thinking MindMap in Leadership
After reflecting on this and other similar discussions, the part that I find most intriguing is that although people generally have a solid grasp of the broader concepts of strategy, they are often much more experienced and comfortable talking to the tactical elements. An inability to define strategies is not unusual for many in entry-level management roles who have less experience and exposure to strategic thinking but this skill-gap becomes an issue when promoted to more senior leadership roles, where this is seen as one of the more important, core skill requirements.

Understanding the bigger picture is important: “Setting strategy isn’t the same as leading strategy. Even the best strategist can falter when it comes to implementing and sustaining the right direction for the business. In fact, statistics indicate that only from 4 to 7 percent of leader‟s exhibit strategic skills, a woefully inadequate amount given the demands of organizations in today’s environment… But the pressure to meet short-term targets and solve functional problems is creating a leadership pipeline with limited strategic leadership capacity…Strategic thinking is grounded in a strong understanding of the complex relationship between the organization and its environment. Strategic thinkers take a broad view; ask probing questions; and identify connections, patterns and key issues” (2).

It may seem to be an odd appraisal in this context but it is clear to me that most managers are more comfortable discussing and managing the numbers than they are at leading their people through addressing the more challenging development requirements or what are commonly referred to as ‘soft-skills’.

Regular discussions surrounding results and the relationship to business targets with team members are common-place. Although relating the coaching session to results is important, challenging an individual to improve their results through highlighting the numbers does not, in itself, provide a platform or understanding of how to change the inputs that contribute to the results and outcomes. In my experience, most people will find other ways to simply meet their numbers, taking short-cuts and often demonstrating behaviours that are at loggerheads with business expectations and culture.

Ironically, these discussions often drive the type of behaviour and culture that the manager is trying to avoid by conducting the meeting in the first place. This relates to the anomaly between strategic thinking and tactical ability in that most managers find it easier to apply the day-to-day tactical elements (numbers and outcomes) than analysing the inputs and considering the bigger picture. This ‘safe-zone’ within the tactical-related realm of thinking, can be enhanced through skill gaps, fear or avoidance as the business KPI’s, outcomes and other results mostly stem from our effectiveness at leading and developing the skills, attitudes and attributes of your people. Most managers accept this rationale but their own fears and self-need to remain within their comfort zone means that they avoid addressing (the perceived) more difficult soft-skill essentials of their team.

So, the question remains, what comes first the strategic or tactical component? In terms of a strategic approach, the point is that most people focus their thoughts and energies at the tactical level, trying (or hoping!!) that the strategies will become more evident at a later date as progress occurs. This thinking is in complete contrast to the more effective methodology where development of a strategy must come first and the goals, direction and tactical actions flow from and towards the strategic concepts.

Factors such as identifying and acknowledging obstacles, discovery of potential solutions, developing a common purpose, understanding values, identifying benefits of improvement and ability to track progress, all form part of the broader concept. In each case these elements should all be drawn back to the strategic view. Relevant questions to ask yourself are:

  • Have you clearly stated what the problem is and considered what you are trying to solve in the first place?
  • Have you developed a strategy with enough context and depth for the tactical elements to be developed and aligned to?
  • Alternatively, have you moved into solutions mode too early, seeking possible responses to the issue at hand without understanding the broader issues and impacts?

As stated earlier, goal or process failure is often due to a lack of clear direction and early identification of the problem to be solved. Often this is referred to as a ‘shotgun’ approach where many ideas and solutions are put into place hoping that one or more will hit the mark and solve the problem(s).

Unfortunately this type of approach has many shortcomings, including cost-blowouts, confusion from poorly communicated actions and a lack of buy-in or reduction in discretionary effort from stakeholders and staff, amongst many other adverse outcomes.

Development of a strategy and the knowledge that there is a difference between strategic and tactical application is a significant topic, not just in the business world, but also in personal decision-making. I have only scratched the surface, however, hopefully this article has stimulated and challenged you to identify the differences between blindly taking action based on little fore-thought or strategic planning. There are many benefits in understanding the ‘bigger picture’ and identifying what you are working towards.

Without an ability to strategise thought into meaningful action you are most likely guessing; making assumptions; and ‘hoping more than knowing’ your future direction and the reasons why this path is the right one.

The good news is that with a change in thought-process and practice, you can develop skills in strategic thinking and implementation, allowing you to become one of the core drivers of change within your business.

As is always the case, the choice is yours!

 

The quality of leadership, more than any other single factor, determines the success or failure of an organization
Fred Fiedler and Martin Chemers

 

 

(1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategy: Strategy @Wikipedia
(2) www.ccl.org/leadership/enewsletter/2011/MAYstrategy.aspx?sp_rid=&sp_mid=36650204: Center for Creative Leadership