DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY

Since it is not possible for one person to perform all activities with respect
to all functional areas because of physical and mental limitations, it
becomes essential that he gives part of his work load to subordinates along
with authority to carry out the assigned task.
Any type of task cannot be assigned to subordinates. Managers have to
decide the tasks that can be performed by subordinates and those which
have to be carried out by them only. Thus, the entire workload is divided
into units, a part is assigned to subordinates along with authority to carry
out the assigned task. This concept of division of work and assignment to
people down the scalar chain is called delegation.
“Delegation is a process the manager uses in distributing work to the
subordinates.”

Delegation is “the assignment of part of a manager’s work to others along

with both the responsibility and the authority necessary to achieve
expected results.”
“Delegation is the process by which a manager assigns tasks and authority
to subordinates who accept responsibility for those jobs.”
 Barriers to Delegation of Authority
• Though delegation enhances efficiency of the
organisation by dividing work amongst organisational
members (according to their capabilities), it is not
free from obstacles.
• These are:
• I. Barriers related to superiors or delegator,
• II. Barriers related to subordinates or delegate, and
• III. Barriers related to organisation.
• I. Barriers related to Superiors:
• 1. Wanting to do things personally:
• Some managers do not delegate because they feel they can do the work
better than others. Since ultimate responsibility is that of the delegator, they
prefer doing the work themselves rather than getting it done through others.
This also helps in maintaining control over the activities assigned to
subordinates. The delegator enjoys doing the work and makes his importance
felt in the organisation by showing his busyness in the office.
• 2. Insecurity:
• If managers feel that subordinates perform better than them, they avoid
delegation. The exposure of their inabilities to take good decisions creates a
feeling of insecurity and, therefore, they fear to delegate. This happens in
organisations where work procedures and methods are not sound. A weak
operating system usually stops the managers from revealing their
shortcomings to the subordinates.
• 3. Retention of power:
• Some managers like to take responsibility, make their importance felt by
everyone in the organisation and want the subordinates to come to them to
get their problems solved. Their desire to retain power and dominate is a
hindrance to the effective delegation process. Such managers are usually
autocratic in nature. They abstain from delegation and prefer to direct people
personally.
• 4. Lack of confidence in subordinates:
• The reward for risk is return. Unless managers assume the risk of subordinates not
performing well, they cannot contribute to the development of skilled managers in
future. A manager who does not take risk in subordinates and lacks confidence in
them will not be able to delegate effectively. Delegation is based on trust between
superior and subordinates. Negative attitude towards subordinates obstructs
delegation as superior lacks confidence in the ability of subordinates.
• 5. Unwillingness to set standards of control:
• Having delegated the duties, managers remain accountable for overall
performance of the work. They supervise the activities of subordinates to ensure
that actual performance is in conformity with planned performance. A manager
who fails to establish standards of control will not be able to effectively delegate to
subordinates.
• 6. Personal factors:
• Autocratic managers usually do not delegate to keep tight control over the
activities of subordinates. Democratic leaders prefer to delegate as they believe in
participation of employees in the decision-making process.
• Managers usually follow past precedents in creating an environment friendly to
delegation. If their managers delegate to them, they also trust their subordinates
in making delegation effective. If their managers did not trust them in delegating
the tasks, they also do not delegate the tasks further.
II. Barriers Related to Subordinates:
• 1. Lack of confidence:
• Some subordinates do not want to take responsibility for the fear of not being able
to perform well. They lack confidence and do not want to take any risk. They prefer
to depend on their bosses to make decisions.
• 2. Fear of making mistakes:
• Some subordinates fear that if they make mistakes in carrying out the delegated
responsibilities, their superiors will criticize them for unfavourable outcomes. This
fear dissuades them from taking added responsibility.
• 3. Lack of incentives:
• Motivation (through financial and non-financial incentives) makes delegation
effective. Subordinates are reluctant to accept delegation in the absence of
incentives.
• 4. Absence of access to resources:
• If subordinates do not have access to resources (financial and non-financial) to
carry out their work, they will not accept delegation of responsibilities. This
happens when there is delegation of responsibility without commensurate
authority.
• 5. Convenience:
• Sometimes subordinates prefer the work is done by superiors rather than
assuming responsibility for the same, for the sake of convenience. They simply
want their bosses to make the decisions.
III. Barriers Related to Organisation:
• 1. Size of the organisation:
• A small-sized organisation will not have too many jobs to
delegate to subordinates. It is, thus, not responsive to
delegation of tasks.
• 2. No precedent of delegation:
• Merely because organisations have not earlier been
following the practice of delegation sometimes makes them
continue with the practice of not delegating the jobs.
• 3. Degree of centralisation or decentralisation:
• Efficient delegation is affected by the degree to which
organisation distributes the decision-making power to
various organisational units. A highly centralised
organisation is obstructive to the process of effective
delegation.
• Ways to Overcome Barriers to Delegation:OR WAYS TO EFFECTIVE
DELEGATION:
• Barriers to delegation can be overcome through the following measures:

• 1. Accept the need for delegation:

• When superiors are reluctant to delegate because they want to do everything themselves rather than
allowing subordinates to do, they should realise the need for delegation. In fact, more the delegation, more
successful will be an organisation.
• Delegation multiplies the capacity of managers. What can be delegated must be delegated. Managers should
do things which subordinates cannot do. This develops their core competence and also the organisation.
• 2. Develop confidence in subordinates:
• Rather than feeling that subordinates are not capable of accepting responsibilities so that delegator does not
take the risk of delegation, the delegator should understand that a man learns through mistakes and if he
commits mistakes, he shall try to find out solutions to the problem also. If subordinates make mistakes,
superiors should guide them rather than not delegate at all.
• Trust towards subordinates develops their commitment towards superiors. Committed subordinates develop
loyalty, dedication and positive contribution towards organisational growth. Delegation should be a
continuous process.
• Managers should appreciate the work of subordinates when they perform well. They should delegate them
more tasks and express trust and confidence in them. This will boost their morale to perform better in
future. Delegation will be effective in the system of rewards, not penalties.
• 3. Communication:
• Where delegation becomes ineffective because subordinates do not have the information for making
decisions, an effective system of communication should be developed so that information flows freely from
superiors to subordinates. Well informed subordinates are an asset for the organisation. They can contribute
to effective organisational decisions.
• 4. Motivation:
• Subordinates should be motivated to accept the responsibilities by providing rewards (financial and non-
financial) like recognition, status etc. Assigning the whole job to one person can be motivating as it reflects
confidence in the subordinate. It also gives a sense of pride and satisfaction to the subordinate who works to
earn the credit for successful completion of that task. Non-commitment towards work has to be converted
into commitment through motivation — creating zeal, enthusiasm, ability and willingness to work.
• .
• 5. Effective system of control:
• Since ultimate responsibility for the work assigned is that of the delegator, he must
ensure that subordinates perform well by setting achievable standards of
performance against which actual performance shall be measured. Delegator should
keep check on the activities of delegates rather than not delegate at all.
• Though control helps in monitoring the activities of subordinates, it should not be
strict in nature. Moderately lenient control system helps to achieve standards by
control through exceptions. Major deviations should be spotted by managers and
minor deviations should be corrected by the subordinates themselves. Control helps
in avoiding misuse of delegated authority.
• 6. Choose the right person for the right job:
• Lack of confidence in subordinates should be overcome by dividing the workload
into sub-units and assigning each sub-unit to persons most suitable for performing
them. The person selected should be able to perform the task assigned. If required,
training facilities can be provided to increase their understanding of the work.
Wrong selection of delegates can put the organisational operations to halt.
• 7. Freedom to subordinates:
• When managers accept the need for delegation, they must also give freedom to
make decisions with respect to the delegated tasks. Rather than not delegating at all
or delegating less responsibility, for the fear of subordinates making mistakes,
managers should give them authority to find solutions to their problems and learn
not to make mistakes in future.
• 8. Clarity of tasks:
• The responsibilities or the tasks delegated must be clearly defined in terms
of results expected out of those tasks. Knowing what is exactly expected of
them will enable the subordinates perform the delegated tasks better.
Delegation is not done without purpose. It has to be properly planned to the
objectives desired to be achieved through delegation. Delegation should be
done to achieve specific results.
• 9. Match job with the abilities of subordinates:
• ‘Round pegs in the round holes’ makes delegation effective as the right job
will be given to the right person. The task assigned should match the
ability and the capacity of subordinates.
• 10. Open communication:
• Though delegatees are given the authority to solve problems related to
the assigned tasks, yet, they should be allowed to freely discuss the
problems with their delegators. Open communication promotes
delegation as both delegator and delegatees can trust each other, explain
their reservations, develop confidence and security and make the need for
delegation felt important for both. Work is delegated and also performed
well — to the best of subordinate’s ability.
• 11. Monitor the critical deviations:
• Subordinates may make mistakes, however efficient they are at work. The
superiors should overlook minor deviations and monitor only major
deviations in the tasks assigned. This promotes a sense of responsibility
amongst the employees.
 Centralisation & Decentralisation
• Centralisation is systematic and consistent reservation of authority
at central points within an organisation. Decentralisation applies to
the systematic delegation of authority in an organisation context.

• Centralisation implies that there exists more than one level within
an organisation and that decisions are made only by the highest
level.
• Therefore, one may say that a centralised organisation has a central
authority and no decisions are made at lower levels.
• Decentralisation encourages the existence of more than one centre
of decision-making.
• A decentralised company empowers lower levels within the
hierarchy to take decisions.
• Merits of Centralisation/Limitations of Decentralisation:
• Following are the advantages of centralisation/limitations of decentralisation:
• (i) Consistency/Lack of Consistency in Decision-Making:
• Centralisation leads to consistency in decision-making; because decisions are taken
by a small group of managers at upper levels of management.According, there are
lesser problems of coordination. In decentralisation, there is a lack of consistency
in decision-making; because a large number of managers at lower levels may
decide the same issue in diverse manners – despite operating within the
organisational policy framework. Accordingly, problems of co-ordination are
accentuated.
• (ii) Strong/Weak Top Management:
• Centralisation of authority strengthens top management; and it is in a position to
provide outstanding leadership to the whole enterprise by virtue of its vast
authority. Under decentralisation, top management is rather weak; as most of its
powers are given away among lower levels of management. It is not in a position
to provide outstanding leadership to the organisation, because of its reduced
powers.
• (iii) Lower/Higher Costs of Administration:
• In a centralised set-up of the organisation, the cost of administration is lesser;
because the enterprise can operate with a limited number of managers. This is a
good advantage of centralisation, in the present-day-times characterised by highly
inflationary conditions. In a decentralised set-up, the cost of administration is
higher; because to operate the decentralised units, a large number of managers is
necessitated.
• (iv) Broad/Narrow Approach to Managing:
• In centralisation, the top management has a broad outlook to managing; as it takes decisions
from the system’s perspective – viewing the functioning of the organisation as a whole. In
decentralisation, the managers of decentralised units have, usually, a narrow outlook to
managing. For them, their own departmental interests are supreme – as against the overall
interests of the whole organisation.
• (v) Discouraging/Encouraging Inter-Departmental Conflicts:
• Centralisation discourages inter-departmental conflicts; because major decisions of
departments are taken at upper levels of management with an orientation towards
departmental co-operation.
• Decentralisation encourages inter-departmental conflicts; because different departmental
managers take decisions in their own unique manners and styles, by virtue of, their vast
powers and hell care for departmental co-ordination and co-operation.
• (vi) Mature/Risky Decision-Making:
• In centralisation, upper management, because of its experience, wisdom and broad outlook,
is more mature in decision-making. Such decisions carry the chance of being least risky. In
decentralisation, lower level managers, because of their less experience, wisdom and narrow
outlook are less mature in decision-making.
• Sometimes, under decentralisation such risky decisions might be taken as might endanger
the very survival of the business enterprise.
• (vii) Retention/Loss of Control by Top Management:
• In centralisation, top management retains tight control over the whole organisation, because
of its vast powers. In decentralisation, top management’s control over the organisation is
loosened; as its substantial powers are passed on to the lower levels of management.
• (viii) Optimum/Less than Optimum Utilisation of Resources:
• Under centralisation, there is an optimum utilisation of organisational resources, because of
rational allocation of scarce resources among different uses. Under decentralisation, there may be,
at times, less than optimum utilisation of resources; because the same set of activities may be
duplicated in various decentralised units – leading to wastage of precious organisational resources.

• (ix) Efficient/Inefficient Handling of Emergencies:

• In centralisation, there is an efficient handling of emergencies by top management; and it can
overcome organisational crises in an intelligent and planned manner. In decentralisation, lower
level management may be frightened by emergencies and run to seek the shelter and guidance of
top management for handling emergency situations.
• Failure to effectively deal with emergencies by lower level management, may tell upon the survival
and prosperity of the whole enterprise.

• (x) Suitable/Unsuitable in the Present-Day Environmental Scenario:

• Centralisation/re-centralisation is highly suitable for tackling present-day environmental scenario;
which is highly volatile and turbulent. Under these circumstances, top management can take sound
decisions in consultation with specialists, from various fields.
• Limitations of Centralisation/Merits of Decentralization:
• Following are the limitations of centralisation/ad vantages of decentralisation:
• (i) Heavy Burden/Light Burden on Top Management:
• Under centralisation, there is heavy burden of management work on top
management; as it has to do strategic planning, policy formulation and controlling
the whole organisation. Under decentralisation, there is light burden on top
management; as much of the management work is passed on to lower levels of
management.
• (ii) Organisational Growth Retarded/Facilitated:
• Centralisation retards the growth of organisation. Strategies of diversification,
expansional programmes cannot be practical for organisation; as top management,
already over-burdened with normal management work, can hardly find time to
think in these directions.
• Decentralisation facilities organisational growth. Dynamic and talented managers
at lower levels coupled with power, can easily conceive of and implement growth
strategies, of course, in consultation with top management. In fact, a trend
towards decentralisation has gained momentum to cope with requirements of
growth.
• (iii) Lower/Higher Status of Lower Level Managers:
• Centralisation decreases the status of lower level managers. As such, they have
less motivation to work, because of the non-fulfillment of their ego needs.
Decentralisation adds to the status of lower level managers. In fact, everything
which goes to increase the status of lower level managers is a measure of
decentralisation. With enhanced status, lower level managers have more
motivation to work.
• (iv) Autocratic/Democratic Management:
• Centralisation may lead to autocratic management, in the organisation. Top management with
unrestricted powers may not hesitate to impose its autocratic policies and leadership styles on the
whole organisation i.e. it may misuse its powers also.
• Decentralisation leads to democratic features in organisational functioning. In fact, under
decentralisation, management decision-making power gets divided among a large number of lower
rank managers. This phenomenon puts restraints over the dictatorial use of powers by the top
management.
• (v) Initiative Discouraged/Encouraged:
• Centralisation discourages the exercise of initiative on the part of lower level managers. Their
creativity and innovative skills have no scope, in the organisation. Decentralisation encourages the
exercise of initiative on the part of lower level managers.
• They can think out and execute their innovative plans, for the overall betterment of organisational
life. Their creativity and innovative skills have full scope in the organisation. That is why; many
decentralised enterprises have progressed a lot, in some cases.
• (vi) Delayed/Quick Decision-Making:
• In centralisation, there is delayed decision-making; because top management is burdened with
many organisational issues and cannot pay timely attention to decision-making. In
decentralizations, there is quick decision-making.
• For one thing, lower level managers have comparatively limited managerial work, as they have to
attend to only their own departmental problems. And for another, they need not seek approval of
upper management for decision-making on issues, for which authority has been decentralised to
them.
• (vii) Inferior/Superior Decision-Making:
• Under centralisation there is inferior decision-making by top management. This may seem
paradoxical; but it is true in the sense that top rank managers are much remote to the situational
factors, in the context of which decisions have to be made.
• Under decentralisation, decision-making is superior, in the sense that lower level managers are
close to the situational factors, in the context of which decisions have to be made. In fact, they
practically deal with situational factors and develop a better sense of their appreciation and
tackling.
• (viii) Managerial Development Retarded/Facilitated:
• Centralisation retards managerial training and developmental process. Under this philosophy, lower
rank managers have little chance of development; because their roles in organisational life are
routinized and they have no or little freedom to exercise initiative and take bold decisions, in an
unrestricted manner.
• Centralisation, in a way, creates problems of managerial succession when some significant top -level
managers retire, due to age factor. Decentralisation, is a systematic way of training and developing
managers for higher managerial positions. This philosophy more or less does away with the
problem of managerial succession.

• (ix) Management by Exception Retarded/Facilitated:

• Centralisation retards the policy of management by exception, under which top management must
concentrate its attention only on strategic issues. Hence, under centralisation, this policy is not
possible; as top management has to attend to all aspects of managing, because of reservation of
substantial decision-making authority with itself.
• Decentralisation facilitates the policy of management by exception. By retaining authority for
strategic decision-making with itself, top management can decentralize substantial authority for
operational management purposes to lower level managers.

• (x) Egoistic/Rational Planning:

• Under centralisation, as a matter of great men psychology, top management, sometimes, may
indulge in egoistic planning for ambitious purposes without caring for the attainment of enterprise
objectives. Under decentralisation, rational planning is done by lower level managers.
• They have comparatively little ambition and ego and care more for attainment of their
departmental objectives through designing and implementing rational plans.