Delegation vs Abdication

In our recent renovation project, the contractor hired a tile guy they hadn't worked with before. The guy turned out to be a complete amateur and bombed the project. 

This could have been easily avoided - 

- by vetting the person more carefully before hiring.  

- ensuring they understand expectations of what needs to be done and can articulate a good approach to do it (just ask them upfront when you delegate). 

- starting with a smaller project to assess their work and abilities, and gradually promoting them to bigger and higher-stakes projects when they have proven themselves. 

- supervising closely and often when they are doing the work, providing feedback and coaching along the way. 

When you are responsible for something and you hire someone else to help you with it, you're still responsible for the thing. 

If they don't perform and you don't manage them well, it affects customers, business, team, your managers, and ultimately, you. 

Delegation doesn't mean abdication. 

Notes:

1. An employee who’s generally good and experienced may not be good at a certain task or project. Andy Grove’s “task-specific maturity” is better to consider when making delegation decisions. 

2. There will be some unavoidable upsets and risk when delegating. But you can control the extent of short-term damage through careful delegation and mid/long term performance through coaching and management.

3. Delegation is harder if you aren’t the domain expert or if you’re hiring a very senior leader where the impact and results of their work are delayed and you need to provide more autonomy to let them do their best. 

4. You give people more autonomy as they prove themselves and earn trust. But you still keep a pulse on the results and outputs, because every employee tethers on the edge of their competence as they grow and get promoted.