👑
Leadershiphigh priority

Promoting Managers: Focus on Skill, Not Just Tenure

The Reddit post discusses the common issue of individuals being promoted to management roles based solely on tenure rather than demonstrated leadership skills. This often results in managers who lack essential abilities like communication, active listening, and understanding their team, leading to team stress and turnover.

Target audience: experienced managers
Framework: Crucial Conversations
3432 words • 14 min read

Empowering Your Team: Using Delegation Levels to Build Ownership and Initiative

The Management Challenge

A common and frustrating challenge for managers is the team that seems unable or unwilling to take initiative. Instead of proactively identifying problems or moving forward with tasks, team members wait for explicit instructions, ask permission for every small step, and appear hesitant to make decisions independently. This isn't just about minor inefficiencies; it's a significant drag on productivity, innovation, and team morale. When employees constantly require detailed direction, managers become bottlenecks, overwhelmed by micromanagement and unable to focus on strategic priorities. The team loses opportunities for growth and skill development, leading to stagnation and disengagement. This dependency culture erodes trust and creates a cycle where managers feel they must provide explicit instructions because the team doesn't act without them, further reinforcing the team's passive behavior. Addressing this challenge is crucial for building a high-performing, adaptable team capable of navigating complexity and driving results without constant oversight.

Understanding the Root Cause

The reluctance to take initiative isn't usually a sign of laziness or incompetence; it's often a symptom of deeper psychological and systemic issues within the team or organization. Psychologically, fear of failure is a major deterrent. If past attempts at initiative were met with criticism, punishment, or excessive correction, employees learn that playing it safe and waiting for instructions is the less risky path. A lack of psychological safety – the belief that one can speak up, ask questions, or make mistakes without negative consequences – stifles proactive behavior. Learned helplessness can also develop in environments where employees feel their input or decisions don't truly matter, or where managers consistently override their judgment.

Systemically, micromanagement is a primary culprit. When managers dictate every detail, employees never get the chance to practice independent decision-making. Poorly defined roles and responsibilities leave employees unsure of where their authority begins and ends. A lack of clear expectations around initiative – if it's not explicitly valued or rewarded – means employees won't prioritize it. Furthermore, insufficient training or resources can make employees feel ill-equipped to handle tasks independently, leading them to seek constant validation or direction. Traditional management approaches often fail because they address the symptom ("take more initiative!") without tackling the underlying causes like fear, lack of clarity, or systemic barriers. Simply telling someone to be more proactive without changing the environment or providing the necessary structure and support is ineffective and can increase anxiety.

The Delegation Poker / Delegation Levels Framework Solution

The Delegation Poker / Delegation Levels framework, popularized by Management 3.0, provides a structured and transparent approach to addressing the root causes of a lack of initiative by clearly defining different levels of authority and decision-making for specific tasks or areas. Instead of a binary "delegate or don't delegate," this model offers a spectrum of seven levels, ranging from the manager making the decision alone to the team making the decision entirely on their own and informing the manager later.

This framework works because it tackles the problem head-on by:
1. Providing Clarity: It removes ambiguity about who has the authority to decide what. Employees understand the expected level of autonomy for each task.
2. Building Trust Gradually: It allows managers to delegate responsibility incrementally, starting with lower levels of autonomy and increasing it as trust and competence grow. This reduces the manager's anxiety about losing control and the employee's fear of being overwhelmed or making high-stakes mistakes prematurely.
3. Empowering Through Structure: It gives employees permission and a clear mandate to operate within a defined level of authority. This structure reduces the need to constantly ask for permission and encourages them to take action within their designated scope.
4. Facilitating Conversation: The process of discussing and agreeing upon delegation levels (often using "Delegation Poker" cards) forces explicit conversations about expectations, capabilities, and potential risks, fostering psychological safety and mutual understanding.
5. Promoting Development: By assigning higher delegation levels over time, managers actively support employee growth and confidence in decision-making.

The seven levels typically are:
1. Tell: Manager makes the decision and announces it. Team implements.
2. Sell: Manager makes the decision but tries to persuade the team why it's the right one. Team implements.
3. Consult: Manager asks the team for input, then makes the decision. Team implements.
4. Agree: Manager and team discuss and agree on the decision together. Team implements.
5. Advise: Team makes the decision, but the manager offers advice first. Team implements.
6. Inquire: Team makes the decision, and the manager asks about it afterward to understand the rationale. Team implements.
7. Delegate: Team makes the decision and implements it. Manager doesn't need to be involved unless the team requests it.

By applying this framework, managers can systematically shift from being the sole decision-maker to empowering the team, fostering a culture where initiative is not only possible but expected within clearly defined boundaries.

Core Implementation Principles

  • Define Levels Clearly: Ensure everyone understands what each of the seven delegation levels means in practice. Use concrete examples relevant to your team's work. This shared understanding is foundational to the framework's success.

  • Match Task to Level (and Person): Assess each task or decision area and assign an appropriate delegation level based on its complexity, risk, and the team's or individual's current skills and experience. Don't delegate everything at Level 7 immediately; start where appropriate and plan to increase levels over time.

  • Communicate Explicitly: For every task or project, clearly state the assigned delegation level to the team or individual responsible. Use phrases like, "For this task, we are operating at Level 4: Agree. We will discuss and decide together," or "For this component, you have Level 6: Inquire. Make the decision, and I'll check in later to understand your approach."

  • Review and Adjust: Delegation levels are not static. Regularly review how the assigned levels are working. Is the team succeeding? Do they need more support (lower level) or are they ready for more autonomy (higher level)? Use this as a coaching opportunity.
  • Step-by-Step Action Plan

    Implementing the Delegation Levels framework requires a deliberate approach.

    Immediate Actions (Next 24-48 Hours)

    1. Acknowledge the Current State (Internally): Reflect on specific instances where the team waited for instructions. Identify tasks or decisions where you currently operate at Level 1 (Tell) or 2 (Sell) but believe the team could handle a higher level.
    Detailed steps:* Make a list of recent tasks. For each, note who did what and who made the key decisions. Assign a hypothetical current delegation level (1-7). Identify 1-2 low-risk tasks where you'd like to increase the level.
    2. Prepare to Introduce the Concept (Without Blame): Frame the upcoming conversation around improving team efficiency, fostering growth, and clarifying decision-making, not fixing a "problem team."
    Detailed steps:* Read up on the 7 Delegation Levels. Prepare a simple visual aid (a slide or whiteboard sketch) showing the spectrum. Think about how to explain it in your team's context.
    3. Schedule a Brief Team Discussion: Set aside 15-20 minutes in your next team meeting or schedule a dedicated short session.
    Detailed steps:* Send a calendar invite titled "Improving Decision-Making & Team Flow" or similar. In the description, mention you want to discuss how the team makes decisions and explore ways to work more effectively together.

    Short-Term Strategy (1-2 Weeks)

    1. Introduce the Delegation Levels Concept: Explain the 7 levels using your prepared visual aid. Emphasize that this is a tool for clarity and empowerment, not judgment.
    Implementation approach:* Present the levels. Ask the team if they understand the distinctions. Use simple, relatable examples.
    Timeline:* During the scheduled 15-20 minute discussion.
    2. Apply to a Pilot Task: Choose one low-to-medium risk task that needs to be done in the next week or two. Discuss its current implicit delegation level and propose a slightly higher level using the framework.
    Implementation approach:* Describe the task. Ask the team, "How do we usually handle decisions like this? What level does that sound like?" Then propose, "Using this framework, I'd like us to try handling this task at Level X [e.g., Level 4: Agree or Level 5: Advise]. What are your thoughts?"
    Timeline:* Immediately after introducing the concept.
    3. Practice Delegation Poker (Optional but Recommended): If using the card-based method, play a round with a hypothetical or real past task to help the team internalize the levels and express their comfort/readiness.
    Implementation approach:* Explain the rules of Delegation Poker. Present a task. Have everyone secretly choose a card representing the level they think is appropriate. Reveal cards and discuss the differences, aiming for consensus or understanding of perspectives.
    Timeline:* Within the first week, perhaps in a follow-up session.

    Long-Term Solution (1-3 Months)

    1. Integrate Delegation Levels into Workflow: Make discussing and assigning delegation levels a standard part of task assignment or project planning.
    Sustainable approach:* For every new significant task or project component, explicitly state the delegation level. Use it in project briefs, meeting notes, or task descriptions in your project management tool.
    Measurement:* Track how often delegation levels are explicitly discussed and assigned. Observe if team members start asking, "What's the delegation level for this?"
    2. Regularly Review and Adjust Levels: Schedule periodic check-ins (e.g., bi-weekly or monthly) to review how delegation is working for specific tasks or areas.
    Sustainable approach:* In team retrospectives or 1:1s, ask about challenges or successes with current delegation levels. Be open to increasing levels as the team gains confidence and demonstrates capability. Be prepared to temporarily lower a level if a task proves too challenging or risky at the current level, framing it as support, not punishment.
    Measurement:* Note changes in delegation levels over time. Track successful task completion at higher levels. Gather feedback from the team on their comfort and confidence.
    3. Celebrate Initiative and Support Learning: Actively recognize and praise instances where team members successfully operate at higher delegation levels or proactively take initiative within their defined scope. Frame mistakes as learning opportunities.
    Sustainable approach:* Publicly acknowledge proactive behavior in team meetings. In 1:1s, discuss what they learned from decisions made at higher levels, including mistakes. Ensure resources and support are available when delegating at higher levels.
    Measurement:* Track instances of recognized initiative. Monitor the team's willingness to try new approaches or make decisions independently. Observe if the team feels safe discussing mistakes.

    Conversation Scripts and Templates

    Using the right language is key to introducing and maintaining the Delegation Levels framework effectively.

    Initial Conversation

    Opening: "Team, I want to talk about how we make decisions and manage tasks. Sometimes, I feel like I'm involved in every small detail, and I suspect that might slow things down or prevent you from taking the lead on things you're perfectly capable of handling. I've been looking into ways to make it clearer who decides what, so we can work more efficiently and you have more opportunities to own outcomes. I came across a framework called 'Delegation Levels' that I think could help. It outlines different ways we can approach decision-making, from me telling you what to do, all the way up to you making the decision entirely and just letting me know. My goal is to give us a clear way to talk about how much autonomy is needed for different tasks, so we can match the right level of decision-making to the right situation and person."

    If they respond positively: "That's great to hear. I'd like to walk you through the seven levels briefly and then maybe we can look at one or two upcoming tasks and discuss what level makes sense for them. How does that sound? We can even try a quick exercise called 'Delegation Poker' to make it interactive."

    If they resist (e.g., "We're used to you telling us," or "What if we make a mistake?"): "I understand that might feel like a big shift, and it's okay to feel a bit uncertain. This isn't about pushing you off a cliff; it's about finding the right balance for each task. We'll start small, perhaps with lower levels of delegation on less critical tasks, and only increase autonomy as you feel comfortable and confident. My role will shift from telling you how to do everything to ensuring you have the support, resources, and clarity you need to make decisions within a defined scope. And mistakes are part of learning; we'll focus on learning from them together, not assigning blame. How about we just explore the levels and try it on one very low-risk task first?"

    Follow-Up Discussions

    Check-in script (during 1:1 or quick chat): "Hey [Team Member Name], I wanted to check in on [Task Name] where we set the delegation level at [Level Number/Name]. How is that going? Do you feel you have the clarity and support needed to operate at that level? Any roadblocks?"

    Progress review (during project update or team meeting): "Let's review [Project/Task Name]. We assigned a delegation level of [Level Number/Name] for [Specific Component]. How did operating at that level feel for the team? What were the benefits or challenges? Based on how that went, does that level still feel appropriate for similar tasks, or should we consider adjusting it?"

    Course correction (when a task isn't going well at the assigned level): "For [Task Name], where we aimed for Level [Current Level], it seems we're encountering some difficulties [mention specific observation, e.g., 'decisions are stalled,' 'there's uncertainty about the next step']. Based on this, I think we might need to temporarily adjust the delegation level for this specific task to Level [Lower Level, e.g., Consult or Agree] so we can work through this together more closely. This isn't a reflection on anyone's capability, just a recognition that this particular challenge requires a different approach right now. Once we navigate this, we can reassess the level for future similar tasks. How does that sound?"

    Common Pitfalls to Avoid

    Mistake 1: Unclear or Inconsistent Communication of Levels


    Why it backfires: If the team doesn't truly understand what each level means, or if you assign a level but then behave according to a different one (e.g., assigning Level 5: Advise but then making the decision yourself), it creates confusion and erodes trust. The team won't know what's expected and will likely revert to waiting for explicit instructions.
    Better approach: Spend sufficient time explaining the levels with concrete examples. For every delegated task, explicitly state the level. Be consistent in your actions – if you assign Level 6: Inquire, let them make the decision and only ask questions afterward; don't jump in to make it for them.

    Mistake 2: Delegating Too High, Too Soon, Without Support


    Why it backfires: Assigning a high delegation level (like Level 6 or 7) for a complex or high-risk task to a team or individual who lacks the experience, skills, or confidence can lead to mistakes, missed deadlines, and increased anxiety. This can reinforce the belief that they can't handle initiative and make them even more hesitant in the future.
    Better approach: Start with lower to medium levels (3, 4, 5) on less critical tasks. Assess the team's or individual's capability and confidence for each specific task. Ensure they have the necessary resources, information, and access to support (including your guidance if needed, but framed as support, not control) before assigning higher levels. Plan for incremental increases in autonomy.

    Mistake 3: Punishing Mistakes Instead of Coaching


    Why it backfires: If a team member operating at a higher delegation level makes a mistake, and the response is punitive (criticism, taking away autonomy, public shaming), you instantly kill any future willingness to take initiative. The fear of failure becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.
    Better approach: Frame mistakes as learning opportunities. When something goes wrong, focus on understanding what happened and why, not who is to blame. Discuss what was learned and how the process or decision-making could be improved next time. Use it as a chance to coach the individual or team, perhaps discussing if the assigned delegation level was appropriate or if more support was needed. Maintain psychological safety.

    When to Escalate

    While the Delegation Levels framework empowers the team, there are situations where you need to involve others.

    Escalate to HR when:


  • • Performance issues persist despite clear expectations (set via delegation levels), coaching, and support, and you are considering formal performance management.

  • • A team member's resistance to taking initiative or following assigned delegation levels appears linked to behavioral issues, insubordination, or conflicts with other team members.

  • • You suspect the lack of initiative is related to issues like burnout, stress, or personal problems that may require HR's resources or expertise (e.g., Employee Assistance Programs).
  • Escalate to your manager when:


  • • You encounter significant resistance to adopting the framework from key team members or stakeholders that you cannot overcome on your own.

  • • Implementing higher delegation levels requires resources (budget, tools, training) that you do not have the authority to approve.

  • • The risks associated with delegating a particular high-stakes task are significant enough that your manager needs to be aware or involved in setting the appropriate delegation level and contingency plans.

  • • The lack of initiative is impacting critical project timelines or strategic objectives, and you need your manager's support to address the systemic issues or provide top-down reinforcement of the new approach.
  • Measuring Success

    Measuring the impact of implementing Delegation Levels helps demonstrate progress and identify areas for adjustment.

    Week 1 Indicators


  • • [ ] Team members can articulate the basic concept of Delegation Levels (e.g., they understand there are different ways to make decisions).

  • • [ ] You have successfully introduced the framework and discussed it with the team.

  • • [ ] You have identified and assigned a specific delegation level for at least one upcoming task or decision.
  • Month 1 Indicators


  • • [ ] Delegation levels are being explicitly discussed when assigning new tasks or projects.

  • • [ ] Team members are attempting to operate at the assigned delegation levels for pilot tasks.

  • • [ ] You observe a decrease in questions asking for permission on tasks where a higher delegation level was assigned.

  • • [ ] Team members provide initial feedback (positive or constructive) on using the framework.
  • Quarter 1 Indicators


  • • [ ] Team members are consistently operating effectively at assigned delegation levels.

  • • [ ] You observe an increase in proactive behavior and initiative within defined delegation boundaries.

  • • [ ] The need for you to be involved in low-level decisions has decreased significantly.

  • • [ ] Team members express increased confidence in making decisions within their scope.

  • • [ ] Project or task completion speed/efficiency improves due to reduced bottlenecks.

  • • [ ] Delegation levels are being reviewed and adjusted periodically based on performance and growth.
  • Related Management Challenges

  • Micromanagement: The Delegation Levels framework is a direct antidote to micromanagement, providing a structured way for managers to let go and empower their teams appropriately.

  • Lack of Accountability: By clearly defining who has the authority to decide, the framework also clarifies who is accountable for the outcome of that decision at the assigned level.

  • Poor Team Communication: Implementing Delegation Levels requires and improves open communication about expectations, roles, and decision-making processes.

  • Resistance to Change: Introducing this framework is a change initiative itself and may encounter resistance, requiring careful change management principles alongside the delegation model.
  • Key Takeaways

  • Core Insight 1: A team's lack of initiative is often a symptom of unclear expectations, fear of failure, or systemic micromanagement, not necessarily unwillingness.

  • Core Insight 2: The Delegation Levels framework provides a clear, structured way to define decision-making authority for specific tasks, empowering teams incrementally and building trust.

  • Core Insight 3: Successful implementation requires clear communication, matching the delegation level to the task and person, consistent application, and framing mistakes as learning opportunities.

  • Next Step: Identify one low-risk task currently requiring your explicit instruction and determine what Delegation Level (3-5) could be appropriate for the team to handle it. Prepare to discuss this task and the concept of Delegation Levels with your team.
  • Related Topics

    manager promotionpromoted based on tenureineffective managersleadership skillsmanagement selectionbad managersteam moraleemployee retention

    Need personalized guidance for your specific situation?

    Our AI Manager Coach provides tailored advice for your unique leadership challenges, helping you become a more effective and confident manager.