From the author: www.coint.inPeople demand specific instructions, and then argue with them. What to do when a task seems to be in the category of delegated, but intuition tells you that this should not be done? Is there some kind of “delegyromometer”? There is a delegyromometer, and more than one. Now I’ll show you both. First of all, you must make sure that the task you want to delegate is in the third zone of coordination, i.e. can be painlessly handed down for independent execution. After this, you answer yourself two questions: Is the problem structured? Will it cause conflict? This is such a primary “hard filter”: 1st decision-making circuit If the problem is limited, and its solution is structured, and solving it at the lower level will not cause a conflict due to the intersection of interests, then you can safely delegate the decision-making down. Of course, you could make the decision yourself. But you don't want to constantly make decisions for them. If they don’t learn to do this, then why did you hire them? If, despite the ease of the task and the obviousness of its solution, delegating it further can lead to an internal corporate conflict, then you will have to make a decision yourself based on the information provided information from your subordinates. These are usually quick solutions that do not take much time. It is a completely different matter if the problem is not limited and the solutions are not structured. Then the task from the 3rd coordination zone smoothly moves into the second. Those. Subordinates will no longer be able to solve this problem on their own. And here we also have two options. If an unstructured problem does not cause a conflict of interest, then you will carry out additional collection of information and its solution through joint efforts. It would be ideal if you did not directly participate in their decision-making, but acted as a coordinator or moderator, or even better, as an observer. And they intervened only when the group reached a dead end or was not rationally spending resources. If an unstructured problem, brought down, will lead to a conflict of interests between different departments, then you will have to be content only with collecting information from your subordinates, and making a decision independently, so as not to add discord to the relations of your team. Let’s assume that the task has passed the first circuit of “rough filtration”, and you have decided to delegate its implementation to your subordinates. Then you will have to decide on specific performers or persons responsible for its completion. To do this, you can use the second “fine cleaning” circuit. Something like this: 2nd decision-making circuit. A scheme of two questions is also proposed here: Does the subordinate have enough qualifications? Is there enough motivation to perform? That is, if the subordinate’s qualifications are at a sufficient level (i.e., he can solve this task), and his eyes are “bright” at the upcoming difficulties (i.e. he wants to find a solution to this problem), you can safely entrust this task to him. If, despite his qualifications, the subordinate is not eager to take on solution to a specific problem. Your role as a manager will be limited to motivating this employee for “future exploits.” In the end, this is what you get paid for. If the employee’s qualifications for solving this task are not very good, but their motivation is in perfect order. Then you will have to assign a mentor to him or act in this role yourself. And you get paid for this too. If the employee’s qualifications are insufficient and he is not eager, then you cannot delegate the task to such an employee. I don’t understand at all what such people are doing in your company. You definitely don't get paid for hiring such employees. Or at least they don't have to pay.