Giving away my power

This month has been an interesting and taxing struggle for me. I delegated work!

Not just any work, but the type of work that I quite honestly enjoy a great deal. I’m quite happy to delegate the stuff I don’t really enjoy doing, but the things I love to do and that I’m pretty good at doing?

The first major shift for me this month was delegating a number of coaching clients to my team. Not unusual in itself, but for the first time, delegating the whole of GAPPS3 feedback.

The second major shift is our new website. Now I’ve been pretty good at creating websites, programming fancy things, building communities and so on, and secretly I thoroughly enjoy doing it and seeing what else the technology can do and how it can help our clients. The trouble is, 90% of the widgets and gadgets never actually get used, and sometimes, people can’t find the important things when they are looking.

So, this time I’ve got in a pro to help. Pam Siow, is an expert at website design and comes highly recommended. The only difficulty for me has been ‘letting go’ and empowering her to do the job.

Does she do things the way I would?
No way!

And whilst that’s why I asked her to do it… oh it’s been tough to just allow her to do her job. I’m glad I did by the way, check out the result for yourself, and do tell us what you think.

So here’s what I learned.

Delegation

Delegate [del-i-geyt]: to send or appoint (a person) as deputy or representative; to commit (powers, functions, etc.) to another as agent or deputy.

I probably spend about a third of my coaching hours helping leaders delegate effectively and empowering their staff. Of course, I have all the theory and ‘proof’ and do have considerable experience of delegating (it is kinda difficult to run hotels, restaurants and pubs or a B. School without using at least some of the staff to help).

Delegating to someone successfully needs the leader to:

1. Establish exactly what to delegate to whom
2. Clarify the specific results you want
3. Clearly define responsibilities
4. Communicate the scope and authority
5. Establish a time frame
6. Monitor progress

So far so good. I knew what to delegate and to whom. Number 2… now that was more difficult, but having chosen to delegate to a professional, I was well guided. Then the erst was easy. Keeping to my side of the deal… well that was a test of willpower smile

Delegation is not that difficult is it?

Not when the person to whom you are delegating knows what they are doing, has the right experience, attitude, motivation and process. So why did I resist it so much? Why was I so uncomfortable?

Partly it’s pride I admit, mostly though, its about power! I’m giving power over my business, my marketing, my public face… to someone else!

Empowerment

Empower [em-pou-er]: to give power or authority to; authorize, esp. by legal or official means; to enable or permit.

Last month in my newsletter, I shared about “Trust” (You can sign up here) – which perhaps is a precursor of empowerment, or for many “trust” is something that comes after the result. You either reduce uncertainty by trusting without certainty, or you reduce uncertainty by shifting the burden.

trussed.jpg

Empowering someone though is much more than delegation and trust. Empowering is giving away your power!

Now if your level of influence (read my article on Influence Level here when you want to know more) is on the lowest rung, “Position”, you will always struggle to empower because ‘power’ is all you have and if you give it to someone else, well how will you influence them?

The key to empowerment is in the second definition above: “Enable” – to make ready, to equip, to make able.

You as the leader need to teach, coach or mentor that person with the skills, knowledge, expertise, means and resources they need to undertake the tasks you wish to delegate to them.

So, strictly speaking, this last month I’ve empowered by coaches to take on some of my clients and I delegated my website to Pam.

The result? Well, judge the latter for yourselves (and do let us have your feedback).

And I’m learning to loosen my grip to gain more control smile

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Simulations – Bridging from thwarted innovation to disruptive technology


SIMULATIONS – BRIDGING FROM THWARTED INNOVATION TO DISRUPTIVE TECHNOLOGY

Gartner Research dubbed simulation the new “killer
application” in e-learning (Lundy et al., 2002) but even
assuming the best estimates for the adoption of simulations,
they represent a tiny proportion of the annual spend in
training and education. Considerable research has been done
to evaluate the effectiveness of simulations and, by and
large, the results suggest that simulations are effective but
there are doubts about even the most fundamental claims of
the efficacy of simulations (Feinstein and Cannon, 2002)
partly because there isn’t a clear, acceptable methodology,
partly because there is no real agreement on definitions, and
partly because there is little agreement on what should be
evaluated. Burns et al. (1990) consider the multi-fold
problem with evaluating experiential pedagogies stating that
there is firstly a need to compare the efficacy to ‘traditional’
approaches, and there is a need to compare alternative
experiential pedagogies competing to achieve the same
learning. Not surprisingly, they note a paucity of solid
empirical evidence regarding the relative effectiveness of
experiential techniques. Other authors (e.g. Pierfy, 1977)
note two particular problems with respect to evaluating
simulations or experiential techniques: the first being the
conceptual problems pertaining to definitions, domain
boundaries and the theoretical basis which underpin and
frame pedagogical research. The second fundamental
problem is that there remain significant methodological
difficulties including experimental design, constraints
within the organisations and institutions, time
considerations and ethical questions associated with any
comparative study.
This paper does not intend to argue in favor of one
approach, method or definition over another but to consider
why simulations have not yet emerged as training and
education’s “killer application” and how it may be possible
to bridge from being a thwarted innovation (Zemsky &
Massy, 2004) to a disruptive technology (Christensen,
1997).

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]