Standard Operating Procedure for Delegation

It is not unusual that a decision to carry out a task is delegated, and the task does not get accomplished as desired. It causes lots of hard feelings and managerial problems. The rules on how to delegate, if followed, would avoid having those problems.

Complete decision. When a task is delegated, the person delegating it must specify the four PAEI imperatives of a decision; otherwise, it is not a complete decision. These imperatives are:

1. What is expected to be done,
2. By when it should be completed,
3. How it should be executed (e.g., whether it requires additional budget, personnel, etc.), and
4. Who is responsible for carrying it out, including whether it requires teamwork and collaboration with specific individuals.

If the delegator omits one or more of these imperatives, the person to whom the task is delegated must ask and get answers regarding the missing details. Never allow an incomplete decision to proceed. An incomplete decision often results in mis implementation, misunderstandings, conflicts, and hard feelings.Doubting a delegated decision. If the person delegated to has questions or doubts about the decision, they should discuss the matter until it is completely clear: what, how when and with whom is expected. Failing to do so may indicate either:

1. The delegated person is too timid to ask questions. In such cases, their agreement to carry out the task cannot be trusted, and the organization must evaluate whether it wishes to retain such an employee.
2. The organizational culture is dominated by an intimidating leader who manages by fear and any questioning is discouraged or over time punished. In this scenario, the delegated individual must decide whether they want to remain employed by such a company.

Disagreeing with a decision. If the delegated person fully understands the task but does not agree with it—because it is not feasible, is based on faulty judgment, illegal, or unethical—they must voice their concerns. Silence implies agreement, by failing to express concerns, they accept responsibility for delivering the task as requested and if the task fails, they will be held accountable for the undesirable outcomes.

If disagreement is expressed but the delegator insists on proceeding anyway, the delegated individual has two options:

1. Offer their resignation, or
2. Accept the assignment and carry it through as instructed but document their disagreement in writing, specifying that they are executing the task under objection. This documentation must be communicated to the delegator.

This step is especially crucial when dealing with Entrepreneurial-type (E) delegators, who may forget prior objections and hold the delegated person solely accountable for the failure of the task. Written records ensure shared responsibility for any negative outcomes.

Tasks must also be recorded  to ensure follow-up. “What gets done in a company is not what is expected, but what is inspected.”

The task cannot be accomplished as planned. If a delegated person realizes this fact, they must notify the delegator on the same day. This allows the delegator to make adjustments—such as revising deadlines, reallocating resources. Keeping difficulties secret in the hope that things will work out is unacceptable. When the deadline arrives, excuses for failure are inadequate. It is better to request permission to revise an imperative than to offer explanations and seek forgiveness after failing to deliver.

Delegation does not mean abdication. In cases where person A delegates to person B, who further delegates to person C, and so on, all individuals in the chain remain responsible for the task.

These rules and procedures look overwhelming, but the process of delegation is often abused and lots of people lose their employment or the company suffers from inadequate implementation of decisions, either not done at all or done badly or done in a wrong time range.