Dr Evil and Mini-Me: A model for leadership development?

Austin Powers’ arch-enemy Dr Evil's miniature version of himself, Mini-Me* was created to do everything that Dr Evil did, in the exactly the same way that he did it. 

Was he on to something?  A key role of every leader is to develop other leaders, yet so few leaders (and especially Salvation Army Officers) seem to do so.  Perhaps we think it’s because we don’t have time, or maybe it’s because of one of the other common justifications. Of course, there is some cost but, as any leader who is in the habit of developing other leaders will tell you, the benefits far outweigh the costs. 

The Eight Most Common Excuses for not Developing Leaders

Why is it that so many leaders are reluctant to develop good leadership around them?  Here are just some of the expressed and unexpressed reasons I have heard and observed: 

1. They will see the inner workings of what I do and will find out I’m not as good as I look.
2. They may turn out to be better than me.
3. They may want to take over my job.
4. I must have exclusivity of some things to demonstrate my higher status as the “the boss”.
5. I don’t have time for training others.
6. Only ordained ministers can do what I do.
7. My congregation members are all too busy to take on leadership roles.
8. They won’t be able to do it well enough.   

Of course, when exposed to the cold light of day, many of these excuses seem weak and self-absorbed, even as we laugh at ourselves for unconsciously holding them.   But one of these deserves a little more attention. 

Excuse #5: I don’t have time for training others. 

This is a very seductive message for people who are running at close to capacity most of the time.  But let’s stop for a moment and do the maths. 

Let’s say I work about 60 hours a week, but I want to train someone to do everything I do, in the way that I do it (an unlikely scenario, but bear with me for the sake of the exercise).  He can watch what I do for the whole week and it would cost me no time at all. 

But I want to do better than that so I spend a few minutes with him at the beginning of each task explaining it.  During the task I may stop to explain from time to time, and at the end I may re-cap.  This whole process may make the task 10% to 25% longer.  Let’s be pessimistic and say it adds another 15 hours (25%) to the working week. 

To enhance his learning further, I decide to have a fortnightly mentoring session with him.  The session will go for 3 hours and I will have to put in about 1 hour of preparation and another hour of writing up the notes afterwards.  That’s a total of 5 hours per fortnight or 2.5 hours per week added to my workload. 

Now, on Day 1 of the training, I realise that as I am planning my day for two people, rather than just myself, so I need to be a bit more organised.  I put an extra half-hour into my daily time-management planning, but because I am better organised actually gain 1 hour per day in productivity.  That’s a gain of 5 hours on the week. 

Also on the first day, I realise that my trainee is keen to do more than just watch, so I can give him less skilled routine tasks straight away.  Even before the training has really begun he can save me at least an hour a day by doing tasks such as photocopying, running to the post office, attending to routine emails, etc.  (And an hour a day is really a pessimistic estimate!)  That’s another 5 hours a week I have saved. 

So even at the end of the first week, before the training has really begun, the whole exercise has cost me much less than two extra hours per day. 

First Week of Training

	The hours I work	Cost to me in hours
	Ordinary Working Week	60
Add	He watches me work	0
Add	Explanations along the way	15
Add	Mentoring Sessions	2.5
Add	Extra time management	0.5
Minus	Better organisation gains	5
Minus	Trainee doing routine tasks	5
	Total Hours of work for me	68

But this is only in the first week of training, and by the second week the trainee is able to carry out at least two hours of unsupervised tasks per day, which means it is getting close to actually giving me more time.  Certainly, within a month, the break-even figure will be passed. 

How about in six months?  Here’s a likely scenario.

After 6 months

	The hours I work	Cost to me in hours
	Ordinary Working Week	60
Add	He watches me work	0
Add	Explanations along the way	6
Add	Mentoring Sessions	2.5
Add	Extra time management	0.5
Minus	Better organisation gains	5
Minus	Trainee doing more complex tasks	20
	Total Hours of work for me	44

Explanations along the way have reduced to 10% of my time, and the trainee could be doing up to 1/3 of the tasks I was formerly doing.  This frees me up with another 16 hours a week to expand the ministry.  How exciting!

The same principles apply on a task-by-task basis.  If you are to train someone to preach, pastor, teach or carry out any other ministry, it costs no more than about 10% to 25% extra time in the beginning, and ends up releasing some of your time.  

Not convinced yet?  In my next post I will address Excuses 6, 7 and 8.  But in the meantime reflect on these emotional, spiritual and practical reasons why developing a leader is good, not just for the trainee, but for you. 

(Click on diagram for full size version.)

*Image above: Mike Meyers as Dr Evil and Verne Troyer as Mini-Me - Copyright Warner Brothers

Résumé Writing – What the Employer Sees

This post is not really about leadership, but a friend recently asked me to coach her on résumé writing so, having put in the work, I thought why not share it with a wider audience.  So here you go. 

Sell, sell, sell, but play nicely

The point of a résumé is to sell yourself enough so that you will get an interview, so you need to show the employer enough of yourself to make a good impression.  If you get to an interview, it becomes your second opportunity to sell yourself a bit further. 

A numbers game

Sending out résumés is a numbers game.  Only about 2% of résumés lead to an interview, so you must be prepared to send many, but every one of them must be personalised to the employer’s needs.  An employer recognises a broadcast résumé in the first few seconds, and only the gracious ones will keep reading.    

Good résumés, with well-managed follow-up, can increase your likelihood of an interview from 2% to about 20%, so it’s well worth learning techniques to create a favourable impression. 

The sad reality is that most employers (myself included) rarely spend more than a few minutes on the first reading of each résumé.  We want to be able to assess quickly whether or not the person could be the one we are looking for. 

The Two Basic Questions

Every employer is looking for an answer to two basic questions, and all other questions serve to help answer these two.  They are:

     1.    Can this person do the job (competencies)?
     2.    Will this person fit into my team, branch or organisation (values alignment)?

What turns me on in a résumé . . .

As an employer, here are a few of the things that I look for in a résumé, and some of the things that research evidence says are effective in creating a good impression. 

ü  The résumé sells the competencies and character of the candidate to me succinctly, clearly and quickly. It is easy to skim read to get the information I want within a few minutes.  The candidate makes sure that every word counts.

ü  It is well set out, typed on size 12 Arial font or similar, is adequately spaced and makes use of bullet points, all of which make for easy reading.

ü  It has a heading with the applicant’s name, address, phone number, e-mail and photo prominently displayed, and each page is numbered. 

ü  The applicant displays an understanding of my organisation and shows that he/she is aligned to its values.

ü  The résumé has a reverse chronological record of employment, education and significant voluntary service with two or three sentences explaining each position.  These explanations will draw attention to measurable achievements, rather than just position/status only.  For example:  “Oversighted a team of 17 operatives all over Taiwan and turned around the trend in declining sales from NT$1,830,000 to NT$2,010,000 in two years”.  Most employers work on the premise that previous history is an indicator of future performance, so let them see your actual experience. 

ü  It has a list of the skills that have actually been practiced by the candidate.  Some of these could be included under each of the positions, but my preference is for a separate list.  I find it easier to skim read. 

ü  The candidate avoids statements that everyone uses like “A team player”.  I actually groan inwardly when I read this.  It is meaningless, and when I have asked about it in interview, applicants have often turned out not to have worked in a team environment.  If you really are a team player, it is better to say “Experience of working in teams”, but be prepared to speak to it in the interview.  The interviewer will be looking for how you handled conflict in the team, and how you used the synergy of the team to get better results. 

ü  If there are any gaps in your work history, put in a very brief note of explanation, or employers will think the worst (unemployable, in prison, drug problem, chronic illness).  A sentence like “Time off for overseas travel” will cover it, but be honest.  Don’t say “Home-schooling my children” when you couldn’t get a job.  If your absence from the workforce is problematic, remain silent on it in the résumé, but be prepared to speak honestly about it in the interview, if asked.  (Most employers will detect if you are fudging.)

ü  The résumé will include some information about what is important to the candidate, how he/she spends her spare time, etc.  This will give me an understanding of the kind of person he/she is (helping to answer basic question 2 above).

ü  The names and phone numbers of previous employers from whom I can ask for a reference.  If I cannot readily get good quality references I will almost certainly abandon the candidate, even if he/she presented a good résumé and performed well in the interview.  If it cannot be confirmed by an “outside” party it could be faked. 

Pretentious Trends that are Meaningless

There are a few trendy things that seem to be coming up in résumés more and more in recent years.  Personally, I do not find them helpful, just rather pretentious.  They don’t help me to answer the two essential questions “can this person do the job?” and “Will he/she fit into my team?”

The first of these is the personal employment objective.  I do not believe it is easy to honestly disclose one’s employment objective.  I Think an applicant is more likely to give the employer wants to hear rather than “To become CEO of the company” or “To gain experience in this job so I can get a better one”, or even “To earn money to live”.  This whole idea attracts dishonesty and I don’t take any notice of them, nor do other employers that I know. 

Another is the personal mission statement.  Let’s be honest, how many people go through life on a personal mission.  Unless you are an evangelist,  social worker, medical missionary, a Salvation Army officer or something similar you’re not likely to be on a mission, so where is your mission statement going to come from? 

Covering Email

Each time you send your résumé, include a covering email.  The purpose of the covering email is to:

1. Demonstrate that you can communicate with professional courtesy, and
2. Sell yourself enough to motivate the employer to open your résumé.

In a covering email, I expect to find . . .

ü  An introductory statement about the reason for your email.  Give the name of the job and where you saw it advertised. 

ü  A paragraph of about three or four sentences that briefly capture your main selling points.  I look for evidence of experience, competencies and values alignment.  You could throw in one major achievement here, but don’t be too verbose. 

ü  A paragraph about how you may be contacted and your availability (Make it as easy as you can for the employer). 

ü  A request for an interview, and a courtesy comment about looking forward to their response. 

ü  Correct grammar and spelling, and a warm and upbeat style throughout.  (In Taiwan it is understood that applicants are using English as a second language so there is some latitude with this, but this would disqualify you from getting an interview in most English speaking countries.)

ü  The email should be short and to the point.   

Follow-Up

If you follow up with a phone call a few days later the chance of getting an interview increases dramatically.  

(The image in this post is provided by freedigitalphotos.net.) 

How to Recruit and Keep Volunteers (Even in the most Uninviting Workplaces)

Despite the negativity of some managers about using volunteers, the rewards can be great.

However, you must take a different approach to managing them than you would paid employees.  At least that is the case in some respects.  In others, they should be managed exactly as you would employees. 

In my last post I outlined some of these differences and similarities and here I want to show you a system of managing volunteers, from recruitment right through to termination, that really works. My colleagues and I developed and used this model for managing volunteers for an extremely difficult work environment; a sobering-up centre.  Working through the night with people who are abusive, vomiting and at risk of life-threatening withdrawal symptoms is not everyone’s cup of tea, but we maintained a volunteer programme of 20 to 30 people who supported our professional staff. 

Appoint a Volunteer Coordinator

One of the first things you should do is appoint a volunteer coordinator.  She could be a volunteer herself, but will need to have some basic management and organisation skills and an upbeat, outgoing personality.  She will need to be available for four to eight hours per week and will take on much of the practical management of the volunteers.  (If you’re just starting out on a volunteer programme you can do this yourself until you find the right person, but be aware of the extra impost on your time.)

Work on developing an effective and reproducible recruitment programme

You have to come to terms with the fact that there is a high attrition rate at every stage of the recruitment, selection, induction and maintenance phase of the volunteer relationship.  (Even if you do all the right things to care for your volunteers, attrition is always high.  This is not a reflection on your management – it’s just the nature of things.)

After some experimentation, our recruitment programme settled down to the following steps: 

1. We placed a small (but relatively expensive) advertisement in the city-wide newspaper and took about 50 to 60 inquiries,
2. We invited them to an information night and supper, and had about 25 to 35 attendees,
3. Around 15 to 20 signed up for volunteer service on the night or in the days that followed,
4. These were put through an induction course which included half a day in the training room, being rostered into a series of 5 training shifts, and completing a journal of their experiences of each shift,
5. 10 to 12 volunteers would complete the course, but some of them were weeded out by us as part of the selection process,
6.  Those that got through this stage were rostered into the activities of the centre, each one committing to at least one shift a fortnight,
7. The whole process was repeated three or four times a year, and in this way we were able to maintain an establishment of about 20 to 30 volunteers.  

Clearly define the volunteer relationship

Each volunteer received a position description, volunteer guidelines, a volunteer agreement, as well as other material defining the nature of the relationship between them and the centre, and the expectations on both sides.  (This link will take you to the guidelines and agreement that we are currently using in Taiwan.  Feel free to plagiarise with pride.)

Develop a volunteer community and celebrate volunteers with non-financial rewards 

About once a quarter, we had a volunteer event that would affirm the contribution of the volunteers.

Sometimes it would be an event just for them, such as a meal and movie night, and sometimes it would be to an occasion to show them off to the rest of the team, who also need to be reminded of their value from time to time.   Awards, gifts and appreciation certificates had an important part to play in such events. 

Volunteers should get all the benefits that paid employees do

If the paid employees get access to tee shirts, meals on duty, Hep B vaccinations, whatever, the volunteers should be getting them too.  This is important to send the message that they are valued members of the team. 

Performance manage volunteers in a forthright, but respectful and professional, way

One of the things that seems to freak out some managers of volunteers is the thought of performance managing them.  But actually, like most of us, volunteers respond best with professional candid approach.   A performance management interview of a volunteer should not be significantly different to that of an employee.  The legal restrictions may be lighter, but a firm and frank, solution-focused approach will usually enhance the commitment of the volunteer and the quality of his work. 

Clarify and validate the volunteer’s departure

Many volunteers are embarrassed about leaving after a relatively short period, so they just quietly avoid getting rostered on in the hope they will be forgotten.  Of course this sets up a dynamic where it is difficult for them to return should they want to sometime in the future.  Having spent resources on recruiting and training a volunteer, it would be best to have the door open to her return. 

We tried to not let this "quietly slipping away" happen, and if a volunteer had not been rostered on for more than a month or so, we would have a conversation affirming that it was OK to leave, and the door is open for her to come back. 

Understand the reasons for high turnover and accept is as part of the cost of doing business

Coming to terms with the reasons why turnover is high (compared to that of employees) will help you to appreciate that, despite this, volunteers are great value and a volunteer programme is well worth the effort.  These are just some of the reasons:

• Left to start paid employment (I am still amazed at the number of long term unemployed people who enter paid employment after only a short period of volunteer work),
• We liked them so much we hired them for one of our paid positions (happened more times than I can count),
• Went off to do a qualification in human services so they could advance in the field,
• Found that our type of work was too challenging for them (it was very in-your-face),
• Had exorcised their ghosts (many do this kind of work because they had a parent who was an alcoholic, or had some other brush with alcoholism or other drug abuse, and it helps them reconcile with their past). 

By being proactive to leave the door open for a return was a real bonus for the centre.  On several occasions, a year or two later after leaving, the volunteer would present as a candidate for a (paid) position.  In the intervening time, they built on the skills we had taught them, gained more, and came back to us with quite a nice package of experience and competencies, as well as a real affection for the centre that got them started. 

Volunteers are not free  - But they are amazing value!

If we’re talking strictly about financial recompense, it is true that we don’t pay volunteers.  But there are costs involved and they need to be understood and budgeted for.    

Advertising for recruitment, management time and appreciation events are not insignificant costs, and you can reasonably expect these to add up to 10% or 20% of what it would cost to have these volunteers on payroll.  But even at this rate, they are still great value simply in terms of cold hard cash.  

But of course the real value of volunteers is not just the work they do, but they people they are.  It is the intangible value-adding that they bring to the workplace in terms of raised levels of enthusiasm, greater commitment to the mission, and fresh ideas and challenges to staleness.  And having a cadre of workers who are “bigger” than the office politics that all organisations suffer from is invaluable.  

So, what’s stopping you from starting a volunteer programme today? 

Managing volunteers is not like herding cats (despite what some managers will tell you)!

(This image: Source unknown)

I never cease to be amazed at the number of leaders, officers and social programme managers who will not use volunteers.  They insist that it is all too hard and it can’t possible work in their situation. 

Actually, nothing could be further from the truth.  In an NGO, there are very few situations (if any) that the contribution of volunteers will not enhance. 

But they do require managing in a different way to employees.  The usual assumptions about employment dynamics do not apply – and I think this is the real reason why some managers don’t want to take on volunteers.  It’s not about the situation; it’s about their willingness to change their management style. 

What are some of the differences and similarities between managing employees and volunteers? 

Managing Employees	Managing Volunteers
The relationship is defined by a financial arrangement	The relationship is defined by “soft” issues such as passion for the cause, loyalty to the leader, or desire to build experience and skills
Employees tends to be more stable and have lower turnover	Volunteers tends to be less stable and higher turnover
Most employees are full-time	Most volunteers are part-time
The manager’s ultimate leverage against poor performance is dismissal leading to financial loss	Dismissal does not lead to financial loss, but will result in other losses
Long term employees are in danger of becoming ”ho-hum” about the work	Enthusiastic volunteers tend to inject a degree of passion and idealism into the workplace
Recruitment and retention is perceived to be easier because of the open employment market dynamics	Recruitment and retention is perceived to be more difficult because both the dynamics of the volunteer market and capacity of the applicants are somewhat hidden and poorly understood
Some employees do not need to be “sold” on the mission to function well and stay in the organisation	Volunteers need to be “sold’ on the mission to function well and to stay in the organisation
Employees’ motivation is strengthened by recognition and being entrusted with challenging tasks	Volunteers’ motivation is strengthened by recognition and being entrusted with challenging tasks
Some employees bring specialist skills, perspectives and experience to the work	Some volunteers bring specialist skills, perspectives and experience to the work
Employees have statutory rights under labour laws	Volunteers have some legal rights in most jurisdictions, but they also have the moral right to be treated with equity and fairness
Employees have the legal right to protection under equal opportunity and health and safety standards	Volunteers have the legal right to protection under equal opportunity and health and safety standards
Employees need a viable, fair and accessible grievance process	Volunteers need a viable, fair and accessible grievance process
It is generally perceived that there needs to be a smaller investment of the manager’s time and resources in reward and motivation activities	It is generally perceived that there needs to be a greater  investment of the manager’s time and resources in reward and motivation activities

What’s in it for me? 

Given all these differences (and not so many similarities), why should a leader employ volunteers?  Here are just some of the reasons why I love having volunteers in my team: 

ü  Volunteers bring a degree and passion and enthusiasm for the mission that we “full-timers” can sometimes lose,

ü  Volunteers bring fresh ideas, newness and are ready to question inefficiencies,

ü  Volunteers tend to be outside the office politics dynamic,

ü  Leaders and other team members are given the privilege of helping volunteers in their skills, career and personal development,

ü  Volunteers value-add capacity and competence to the team as a whole,

ü  Volunteers can provide a pool in which to fish for employees.

(This image from: FreeDigitalPhotos.net)

Are you convinced about using volunteers yet?  I hope so.  In my next post, I will share how easy it is to recruit, select, induct and manage volunteers, and I will provide some sample tools that you can adapt for your local setting. 

No more dragon-ladies - Please!

Have you ever wondered what makes the office dragon-lady the way she is?  Did you ever stop to consider why some people are lovely to know socially, but are workplace tyrants when they’re in charge of a team? 

It could have something to do with their limited repertoire of behaviours in the face of frustration.  

Leaders’ behaviour has a much greater impact on the members of a team than any other single person on the team.  Every behaviour the leader gets even slightly wrong is magnified in its impact on the team.  Yet we have the responsibility of keeping everything and everyone on track.  If things are not moving quickly enough, or members of the team are not cooperating, it is so easy to become either too aggressive or too passive, either of which could threaten the cohesion of the team. 

What is the answer to this dilemma? 

The leader has to recognise that he/she is responsible for his/her own behaviour and thoughts.  Most teams will forgive a rare expression on frustration but, beyond this, the leader must be in control of him/herself all the time.

The dragon-lady and workplace tyrant have yet to learn this lesson.  They have not learned to express their opinion, get what they want and move the team forward without resorting to abusive techniques. 

In a frustrating situation there are essentially three behaviour styles that a leader can adopt; passive, aggressive or assertive. 

The Aggressive Leader

The aggressive leader is the one that gets her way without respecting the opinions and feelings of her team members. She may indulge in some extreme behaviour such as shouting, screaming or table banging.  She will generally display non-verbals that are closed, contemptuous and hard.  She is the kind of person that a team member is not likely to approach for advice or guidance.  The key characteristic of her relationship with her team members is fear.

This leadership style does not provide an environment for open communication, creating the probability of vital information not being transferred, de-motivation of team members and strained workplace relationships, all of which results in lower productivity and “soldiering”^.

The Submissive Leader

The submissive leader is the one that gives way to the opinions and feeling of her team members and has little regard for her own.  She avoids conflict and so she often has to resort to manipulative ways to get the job done.  It is not uncommon for her to get caught up in playing favourites and using back door methods to progress the work of the team.  Her workplace is often characterised by bitchiness and back stabbing.  She provides no emotional safety for the team members.  She is usually seen as a “peace at any price” kind of boss, and the domineering members of the team tend to step into the power vacuum and take over. 

The Assertive Leader

The assertive leader is able to issue instructions and directions while at the same time respecting the feelings and the opinions of her team members. 

Fundamental to her belief system is the premise that everyone deserves to be treated with courtesy and respect, and she uses the basic tools of politeness and patience combined with good listening skills and creative problem solving.  She is willing to compromise on some less important things so that she can “win” the important issues. 

She finds that, as she treats her subordinates with respect, they tend to give cooperation in return.  Though her methods might be slower (in that she takes time to win trust and confidence), in the long term her team is more effective and efficient. 

What kind of leader would your team members say you are?  

(Photos courtesy of FreeDigitalPhotos.net)

Six Leadership Tips from Jim Collins

This post by August Turak is so practical and useful, I just had to re-post it as is.

Great advice on time management, staying focused, hiring and firing - the distillation of many years of practical, front-line leadership experience.

Judge for yourself!

If you want a job well done, don't do it yourself!

When delegating doesn’t work

For some people delegation is so unnatural and counter-intuitive that they really can’t get past the old mothers’ wisdom that “if you want a job done well you should do it yourself”.  And then when they try to delegate and it fails it only serves to reinforce their belief that they were right all along. 

But delegation fails, not because it is inherently inferior, but because of how it has been carried out.  Delegation fails when . . .

1.    Responsibility is delegated without  authority

One of the most frustrating and disempowering experiences your team members can have is to be given a task but not the authority to carry it out. 

I recently heard of a manager that was appointed to “clean-up” a certain organisation that had become inefficient and ineffective.  It was experiencing poor team morale, sales were down, productivity was low, and staff turnover and absenteeism were through the roof. 

But, the new manager was given no authority to performance-manage any of the staff.  She was not allowed to intervene in the production side of the business, she was not given up-to-date business information, and she was not allowed to hire and fire.  In fact the only thing she could do was drive the marketing and sales campaigns.  In a nutshell, she was not given the authority she needed to do the job! 

Although she made impressive gains in the one area she had control over, marketing and sales, it was only a few months before she left the job in frustration. (And I just heard she is thinking of setting up her own rival company!  Wouldn’t you feel annoyed with yourself if you were the leader who had let that talent slip through your fingers?)

Whatever the job, large or small, it is important that the delegate is given all the authority she needs for doing the job.

2.    The leader doesn’t understand the capacity of the team member

Understanding the capacity of the person to do the task you are giving them is an important skill for a leader. 

The strengths and inclinations of your team member should be a guide to what you can delegate, how close you should monitor, and the quality of work you can expect. 

There is a balance to delegating tasks and responsibilities that are beyond the team member’s experience. 

On one hand, it’s good to occasionally delegate so that the experience is going to be a growth and development opportunity for your team member.  You have to understand that you won’t get perfection this time round, but you are building for the future. 

On the other hand, don’t give him a task that is so far away from his skills, gifts and preferences that he will be entirely out of his depth.  He will flounder and feel that he is inadequate and incapable.  It will be a blow to his confidence, and may prevent his future growth.

3.    The job was not properly communicated

We all come to each interaction with a set of pre-conditioned expectations, and if your’s are different to your team member’s the scene is set for a delegation failure. 

This is particularly true of (but not limited to) those who work in a cross-cultural environment. 

Recently, I asked a member of my team to provide an account name and number on a document.  When the document arrived on my desk it had the account name and number but no other information. 

I had assumed that it was implicit that all the other information would also be provided and that I was giving instruction on this limited aspect of the form (Western perspective).  My team member had acted on the implication that I wanted only what I had specifically asked for (Eastern perspective). 

Of course, this misunderstanding was minor and easily rectified, but for a major task or role fixing the problem is not always so easy. 

These kinds of errors are common and I have often heard managers blame the delegate without properly analysing what went wrong.  The way I try to minimise miscommunication errors is three-fold. 

a. Start with verbal explanation of the task / role, 

b. Follow-up with something in writing, which could be some dot-points on a scrap of paper or informal meeting notes, through to formal meeting minutes or a position description (depending on what is being communicated), 

c. During the life of the task / role, make sure that you check-in with the delegate frequently, especially in the early stages.

4.    The leader interferes in the delegated task

There is nothing more tempting than the urge to take over a task that we can see is being done slowly, poorly or ineffectively. 

But this is an absolute killer to the trust and loyalty of the team member who is doing the job.  And the chances are that she will not remain silent about this this kind of interference.  She may or may not talk to you about your interference, but you can be certain that she will tell the rest of the team.  It is a sure way of building resentment and distrust in your whole team. 

Resist the temptation to take over.  Offer help, offer guidance, provide feedback, but only when the situation is really, really, really desperate should you take over. 

5.    The leader “sets it and forgets it”

A hundred years ago (give or take), I trained for management for the hospitality industry.  In one particular practicum I was assigned to a hotel as a “night controller”.  The incumbent of this now out-dated position worked through the night to carry out manually the accounting tasks now carried out in seconds by the computer behind the reception desk.  When you checked out, for example, did it ever occur to you that someone had been awake all night making sure that your bill, along with those of the 500 other guests, was up-to-date?

What a complex and time-consuming task this was (albeit simple in concept).  Billing information had to be gathered from every phone record, bar, restaurant, kitchen, service and housekeeping department.  It had to be made sense of, and charged to the right customer, all before the first of them began to check out at 7.00am or earlier. 

Now, in this complex and highly time-critical environment, this rookie trainee was blessed with a “set it and forget it” manager.  Her mantra was “I already told you how to do that!”

Consequently, until I got up to speed, there were a lot of customers that didn’t get charged all they should have, and possibly one or two that were overcharged. 

Further, because she was also a real dragon lady, I was reluctant to ask her if I was in doubt about anything.  The financial cost to the company could have been considerable, and the cost in morale (therefore staff turnover and absenteeism) could have been very high.  But my manager had no regard for these things. She was more concerned about the personal inconvenience to herself. 

Except in the most ideal of circumstances, the “set it and forget it” approach never works!

6.    The leader delegates then passes the blame when things go wrong

Napoleon is attributed with the words, “There are no bad soldiers; only bad officers’, a statement that has influenced my leadership for many years. 

A leader who delegates well will monitor with the right level of involvement so that things are less likely to go wrong.  He will make sure that the team member has all the information, authority, materials and tools he needs to do the job. 

When things go wrong he will absorb the criticism levelled from outside of the team, while appropriately and discretely apportioning it inside the team.  There is nothing more embarrassing that hearing a manager saying “It wasn’t my fault, it was XXX (name of a team member)”. 

When a manager says this to me, I know that he is really admitting that he failed to both properly manage his team member, and to take responsibility for his poor management.” 

If I was making a list of “Things that will engender distrust and disloyalty in the team as well as break down relationships with peer-level managers”, this would be near the top. 

Finally, a reminder . . .

In a previous post Why Tasks Don’t Stay Delegated I have presented a simple tool to help delegation decisions.   Take a look – you might find it helpful.