Search PubMed⌕ Search

PubMed · 11499078

Delegation: developing the habit.

Abstract

Often, individuals take personal delegation skills for granted and assume the presence of expertise with the practice of delegation, which may not be the case. Those assumptions can be found at both ends of the process, with the manager and the employee. Every time a manager places an employee in a job and gives him or her a job description or a set of instructions, the manager has delegated. The manager has placed someone in a position to perform operations for which ultimately the manager is responsible. Delegation is both a process and a condition. The process is the act of assigning work to an employee; the condition of delegating a job is a thorough and mutual understanding between the supervisor and the employee of specific results and methods by which these results can be achieved. The condition goes far beyond the simple process of assigning a job. The point at which many managers fail in delegating is in neglecting to move past the process and take the required steps to establish a true condition of delegation. Failure to delegate is the leading cause of managers retarding their professional growth. In the case of a workaholic--someone who fails to learn the value of delegation--the job soon becomes too much, and the effectiveness of the department may suffer. By reducing the burden of technical duties and busy work, managers will find that it is possible to be more effective and actually spend more time managing. A number of the reasons why managers fail to delegate are complex and subconscious, such as insecurity, fear of competition and even fear of not being recognized for accomplishments achieved. Other reasons for failing to delegate are habit and shortages of staff members or time. Delegation is an investment in time. The eventual gain from such an investment, which may temporarily cause the department to fall further behind during a training period, outweighs the costs. The manager is the final authority in such duties as approval, recommendations and implementations. Remember that to delegate authority does not mean to delegate ultimate responsibility. Only the manager should bear the burden of responsibilities that directly affect his or her career. One of the most common mistakes in the process of delegating is to turn an employee loose on a job with inadequate instruction. Too often this is caused by lack of time. Strictly speaking, when managers assign tasks to employees, they are delegating the authority to perform the task. However, all responsibility for the completion of the task remains with the manager. In most instances, responsibility for the failure of a delegated project lies with the manager, not the employee. While some failure is to be expected, it can be minimized by proper evaluation of the situation and proper communication. Delegation is a calculated risk. The manager should be willing to take a risk to see if an employee does have the skills and ability to perform the specific task. How else will the manager ever know? Developing a strong habit of delegation will lead to development of an effective and efficient staff and department. Delegation will serve not only the organization well, but also managers throughout their careers.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

G L Duehring. Delegation: developing the habit.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11499078/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Exploring the effects of telehealth on medical human resources supply: a qualitative case study in remote regions.

BACKGROUND: The availability of medical human resource supply is a growing concern for rural and remote communities in many countries. In the last decade, various telehealth experiences in Canada have highlighted the potential impact of this technology on professional practice. The purpose of this study was to explore physicians' and managers' perceptions regarding the potential of telehealth to support recruitment and retention of physicians in remote and rural regions. METHODS: A case study in Eastern Quebec was performed to explore this complex phenomenon. The analytical framework was based on two literature reviews and a Delphi study. Data were collected from semi-structured interviews with 41 physicians and 22 managers. Transcripts were produced and interview content was coded independently by two judges and validated by an expert panel. RESULTS: Interviews have highlighted the potential impact of telehealth on several factors influencing the recruitment and retention of physicians in rural and remote regions. The potential effects of telehealth on physicians' choice of practice location could be seen at the professional, organizational, educational and individual levels. For instance, telehealth could improve work satisfaction by allowing a regional on-call duty system and a better follow-up of patients. However, there are also certain limits related to telehealth, such as the fear that it would eventually replace all continuing medical education activities and onsite specialists in remoteregions. CONCLUSION: Telehealth is likely to have an impact on several factors related to medical workforce supply in remote and rural regions. However, the expected benefits will materialize if and only if this technology is properly integrated into organizations as a support to professional practice.

Administrative Personnel↗

Evaluation results of the CDC/ASPH Institute for HIV Prevention Leadership: a capacity-building educational program for HIV prevention program managers.

OBJECTIVE: The goal of this research was to evaluate changes over time in the capacity of participants of the CDC/ASPH Institute for HIV Prevention Leadership (Institute), a capacity-building program for HIV prevention program managers in minority-based, community-based organizations. Capacity was defined as the application of new skills and knowledge to participants' jobs and confidence in using those new skills and knowledge to strategically manage and apply "best practices" to their HIV prevention activities. METHODS: This is a longitudinal study involving measuring scholar capacity at three points in time: pre-Institute, post-Institute, and 6 months' post-Institute. Only responses from participants who completed all three surveys are included in this final analysis of the data (N = 94). RESULTS: Results indicate that participants from 3 years of the Institute (2002-2004) increased their capacity in HIV prevention programming and strategic planning and management. Significant changes were seen in the frequency and self-efficacy with which participants conduct several HIV prevention programming activities. Participants also reported conducting strategic planning activities at more appropriate intervals and were significantly more confident in conducting these activities. CONCLUSION: The Institute has positively and significantly increased the capacity of participants to conduct more effective HIV prevention programs on a national level.

Administrative Personnel↗