Russ Foresters' article "Empowerment: Rejuvenating a potent idea" focuses more on what not to do than what you should do, but he does cover both extremes well. I find his examples poignant and informative; and I understand that when you are trying to achieve something, it is very beneficial to understand what not to do and where not to turn.
Both the text and the article describe the inputs needed to empower others yet they have different names for most of them. Self-efficacy is explained in both and seems to carry the torch leading the charge into empowering all levels of the organization. You have to allow everyone to feel like they are contributing to the cause. You have to bare witness to attitudes and competencies of individuals at this point to ensure that abilities and attitudes match tasks given and that they are ready to accept the responsibilities.
Self-Determination plays a key role in empowerment and sets the pace for amount of delegation. People will show you how driven they are by the way they cut their path, more responsibility will go to those who have demonstrated their worth and are scratching at the door for more.
Tooling those who have made it this far is a necessity, you have to train them in various aspects of their responsibilities in order to make them effective. This is costly and may be a deal breaker for some organizations. Ambiguity may become an issue here as well, people are going to be chomping at the bit to gain as much from the company as possible. This is beneficial but can be costly, not only to the budget but also the structure of the organization. If you give the person the tools to accomplish a variety of tasks they may find that they are now highly employable in other fields. So scrutinize those trying to grab across the line into other levels yet be open to the idea for proven company individuals who have bled with the company and interject positive ideas regularly.
A major motivator in the empowerment system is personal consequence, most people think they want more power but are ignorant to the consequences that coincide with their choices. This drives individuals to do more research to empower themselves with knowledge and foresight to be in a position to make crucial decisions quickly and effectively. This all ties back into determination and efficacy because those who want to empower themselves will do what they can for the company in hopes that the company will respond in kind.
Trust and meaning are other crucial building blocks of an empowered organization and also holds close ties to the aforementioned criteria. Those in power have to trust those under them to make decisions on their behalf, and those on the underside have to trust that the delegation given to them is for the organizations benefit.
A meaningful job is something that most of us strive for. We want satisfaction and reward for our accomplishments. This a balancing act for an empowered group because they are incorporated into so many facets of the structure. They may do a lot of things that they don't particularly enjoy but it is important that they give their all for each sub-task. If not personally balanced some will move into a comfort knowledge base and fall short on other duties.
The main implementation criteria with delegation empowerment is to take it slow and assess everything and everyone individually to ensure cohesiveness and structural feasibility. Some people will still have more power then others, but that will be on their own accord in conjunction with their personality.
No comments:
Post a Comment