To Delegate or Not to Delegate; One more for early-stage founders making existential decisions
Last week I gave readers of the startup inclination some suggestions; certain questions you should ask yourself before deciding whether to fold your startup and pivot to something new or double down on your idea. Some of you asked for more details on why these questions are important, so here are two scenarios.
Say, two years ago you were looking for ideas for a startup, happened upon something interesting that VCs liked too, raised funding and got going, but things are slow now. You wanted to build the next “XYZ” unicorn. Or at least build a high-growth business in five years, then cash out and move on to the next idea. You want to be a serial entrepreneur. Well, in this case, it is unlikely to make sense for you to just stick with it if you don’t have much traction and you can’t see a quick way to change that. If nothing else, it will demoralise you.
On the other end of the spectrum though, say you have faced a particular problem that had no good solution. Maybe you couldn’t access easily certain types of supplies for your baby. Or you couldn’t get a certain type of service for your ageing parents who need care and live far from you. Or the availability of certain services tailored to your industry is weak, or non-specific. Or something else but it’s a clear pain point you and many others have. You haven’t yet figured out the exact product that everyone loves, but those who’ve been using what you already have like it. It is likely it will make sense for you to keep working on this. Push through the pain.
Many founders will fall somewhere within, or outside this spectrum. Hence the questions – as I don’t believe in one-size-fits-all solutions. If you missed it, you can check out the questions to get you started on either rethinking or doubling down here:
What I wanted to talk about today is Delegation of Tasks vs Delegation of Responsibility – or why not every leader has to delegate everything
Here’s a cliched saying: leaders delegate everything.
It is cliched, which means it’s not wrong and it’s not right either.
It is a cliched advice (or order) often given
to micromanagers by their bosses or peers
by people who worked for micromanage
,to technical experts new to general management
This advice/order won’t do much for the first group. There may be many reasons why people become those most annoying of species, the micromanager. But being told to stop is not going to help. They might micromanage because they have issues with control; because they have trust issues; because they themselves were always managed that way and are so used to it they don’t even realise. And so many other reasons. Perfectionism. Fear of failure. Control (I said that already but it's worth repeating).
Whatever the reason, they will need coaching and training as they need to change. And yes, of course they need to learn to delegate. But not just delegate tasks. That makes things worse.
For most of us, it is painful to work for micromanagers. Delegating does not solve this, because they delegate TASKS and then still micromanage their subordinates' attempts at doing those tasks. Double check every single thing, give precise orders that cannot be deviated from no matter what.
What micromanagers should be doing is delegating some responsibility and allowing people a certain level of autonomy. Which is just too hard for them. It’s painful for them to let go of the control.
Before I get crucified for saying ‘delegating responsibility’ I’d like to clarify I don’t mean shirking responsibility. I mean empowerment and accountability. Naturally, if you’re the boss the buck stops with you.