Authority and Delegation – Meaning, Definitions, Features, Sources (BBA/MBA Notes)

Delegation of Authority

Delegation of authority is a process concerned with a superior giving power and discretion to a subordinate to make a decision with regard to his or the department’s performance. Therefore, a superior can delegate only authority that is given to him. This applies to all levels of management, be it the board, chief executive officers or senior managers. Delegation of authority is necessary wherever a manager relies on another person for performance, but at the same time, the superior retains the responsibility and authority. This implies that the superior remains responsible and is answerable for the assigned performance to his superior. Thus, delegation is the process of entrusting part of the work by the superior to his subordinates.

According to O.S. Hiner

Delegation takes place when one person gives another the right to perform work on his behalf and in his name, and the second person accepts a corresponding duty or obligation to do what is required of him.

According to L.A. Allen

Delegation is the ability to get results through others.

Features

i. Delegation is authorisation to a manager to act in a certain manner. The degree of delegation prescribes the limits within which a manager has to decide the things. Since formal authority originates at the top level. It Is distributed throughout the organisation through delegation and redelegation.

ii. Delegation has dual characteristics. As a result of delegation, the subordinate receives authority from his superior, but at the same time, his superior still retains all his original authority. Terry comments on this phenomenon like this: “It Is something like Imparting knowledge. You share with others who then possess the knowledge, but you still retain the knowledge too.

iii. Authority once delegated can be enhanced, reduced, or withdrawn depending on the situation and requirement. For example, change in organisation structure, policy, procedure, methods-, etc., may require change in the degree of delegation of authority.

iv. Delegation of authority Is always to the position created through the process of organising. The Individual occupying a position may exercise the authority so long as he holds the position. Therefore, the authority Is recovered fully from the Individual when he moves from the particular position.

v. A manager delegates authority out of the authority vesting In him. He cannot delegate which he himself does not possess. Moreover, he does not delegate his full authority because if he delegates all his authority, he cannot work.

vi. Delegation of authority may be specific or general. Delegation of authority is specific when courses of action for particular objectives are specified. It Is general when these are not specified, though objectives may be specified.

Process of Delegation

Irrespective of the level at which authority is passed on to the subordinates, delegation of authority involves certain actions, which may be express or implied. They are:

i. Determination of Results Expected

Authority should be delegated to a position according to the results expected from that position. Since authority is intended to furnish managers with a tool for so managing as to gain contributions to the organisational objectives, it is essential that authority delegated to a manager is adequate to ensure the ability to accomplish results expected. It implies that results expected from each position have been Identified properly. To the extent there Is clarity in these, delegation will be effective. Therefore, the first requirement Is the determination of contributions of each position which Is largely a step undertaken at the stage of creating various positions.

ii. Alignment of Duties

The second step Is the assignment of duties to the subordinate! Duties can be described in two ways: First, these can be described in terms of an activity or set of activities; for example, selling activity to salesman. According to this view, delegation involves assignment of these activities by a manager to subordinate. Second, duties can be described in terms of results that are expected from the performance of activities, for example. how much sale is to be achieved by salesman. Assignment of duties In terms of results I expected works better because a subordinate is likely to get psychological satisfaction from I his work, and he will have advance notice of the criteria on which his performance Is to be I judged. A man’s duties will be clear to him only when he knows what activities he must undertake and what goals he must fulfil.

iii. Authorization for Action

The third aspect involves granting of permission to take actions, like making commitments, use of resources, and other actions necessary to get the assigned work done. This problem Is essentially one of determining the scope of authority to be I delegated to each particular subordinate. In the delegation process, the manager confers upon a subordinate the right to act in a specified way or to decide within limited boundaries The subordinate exercises the authority in conformity with his understanding of the Intentions of the superior who delegates It to him and within the framework of such controls as the superior deems it wise to establish. The process of delegation states out the boundaries j of permissible actions, separating them from actions which are not permissible. The central problem, therefore, is to determine what scope of authority the superior wishes his  subordinates to exercise. A ground rule in this context is that the scope of authority allocated I! to individuals by the superior is inseparably linked with the activities allocated to them.

iv. Creation of Obligation

The last aspect of delegation is to create obligation on the part of subordinate for the satisfactory performance of his assignments. A subordinate is responsible for the total activities assigned to him and not only for the activities actually being performed by him. The sense of obligation required arises from the maintenance of responsibility by the superior and an accompanying insistence that the work performed must meet his expectations.

Principles of Delegation

Delegation of authority is a conscious effort on the part of the manager. Therefore, in delegating authority, he should observe certain principles so as to make delegation effective. Unless these principles are observed, delegation may be ineffective, consequently, & organization may fail and the managerial process may be seriously impeded. Following are such principles:

i. Authority should he coextensive with responsibility

Since authority is the discretionary right to carry out assignments and responsibility is the obligation to accomplish them, authority should correspond to the responsibility. Thus, responsibility for actions cannot be greater than authority delegated, nor should be less. This parity is not mathematical but, rather, coextensive, because both relate to the same assignment. Both under-delegation and over-delegation are equally bad. Proper delegation of authority Increases operational efficiency, satisfaction of need for autonomy, feeling of Involvement, and saving time of superiors. Inadequate delegation, on the other hand, creates lack of commitment, lack of Initiative, frustration among employees, and overburden of superior managers. Similarly, over-delegation also affects organisational operation adversely. In this case, a manager may have authority for those actions for which he cannot be held responsible. Thus, a tendency may develop to avoid responsibility. Moreover, authority without responsibility may develop unhealthy trend in the organisation for cornering more and more authority jeopardising the organisational objectives.

ii. Responsibility cannot be delegated

It is only the authority which can be delegated and not the responsibility. The manager remains accountable to his superiors even for the tasks assigned by him to his subordinates.

iii. Absoluteness of Responsibility

Responsibility of subordinates to their superiors for performance is absolute; once they have accepted an assignment and the authority to carry it out, superiors cannot escape responsibility for the performance of activities of their subordinates

iv. Dual subordination should be avoided

If a subordinate receives orders from many superiors, then he may be unable to comply with any one of them. In other words, a subordinate should receive orders from one boss to comply with the orders.

v. The exception principle may be followed

When authority is delegated, it is expected that the subordinate will exercise his own judgement and take decision within the purview of his authority. He is to be given freedom to operate within his authority even at the cost of mistakes. But only when he cannot make the decision at his level, he should refer the problem upward for advice of his superior. Also if some problem arises which is outside the scope of his assigned duties, he should refer this matter upward.

vi. Clarity of Lines of Authority

Each position in the organisation is linked with others through authority relationships; some directly through line authority, others indirectly. More clearly these lines of authority are defined, more effective is the delegation of authority. In this respect, classical authors have given two principles which guide the delegation of authority. These principles are scalar chain and unity of command. Scalar chain principle refers to the chain of direct authority relationship from superior to subordinate throughout the organisation. Clearer the line of authority from the top manager to every subordinate position in the organisation, the more effective will be responsible decision making and organisational communication. The other principle, that is, unity of command suggests that a subordinate should be responsible to a single superior and he should receive instructions from the same superior only. The more complete an individual has a reporting relationship to a single superior, the less is the problem of conflict in instructions and greater the feeling of personal responsibility for results.

vii. Level of Authority

Authority level principle suggests that maintenance of intended delegation requires that decisions within the authority competence of Individuals are made by them and not referred upward in the organisation structure. Thus, managers should make whatever decisions they can in the light of their delegated authority and only matters that authority limitations keep them from deciding should be referred upward. This is possible if authority delegation is clear and managers at each level are sure what authority they have.

A problem comes when two or more managers can decide the things jointly without referring the matter upward but singly none of them can decide. Such a matter may be related with inter-departmental functioning. A single manager cannot make decision because of splintered authority. Splintered authority exists wherever a problem cannot be solved or a decision made without pooling the authority delegation of two or more managers. For example, production manager of plant A can reduce his costs by some procedural changes in plant B. However, he cannot do this unless he pools his authority with manager of plant B. Alternatively, he can refer the matter upward and positive thing can happen by the action of common superior. In such a case, it is preferable to consolidate and pool splintered authority rather than referring the matter upward for decision. Splintered authority cannot be wholly avoided in making decisions. However, recurring decisions on the same matters may indicate the need for reorganization and redelegation of authority.

viii. Delegation by Results Expected

As discussed earlier, delegation should be based on results expected from a position in the organisation. Since authority is intended to achieve « certain outcomes in the organisation, it should be adequate to achieve those outcomes; A manager is expected to perform better if he knows what he has to contribute arid he has commensurate authority for that. Delegation by results expected implies that planning exercise has been taken and goals for each position have been set, communicated, and properly understood by those who are responsible for achieving these goals. Often managers fail to delegate adequately because either they have very vague ideas about the contributions of their subordinates or they just do not bother to determine whether the subordinates have authority to do the things.

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Scroll to top
You cannot copy content of this page. The content on this website is NOT for redistribution