I was talking to a business owner recently who was frustrated that something she'd handed over to a member of her team wasn't working particularly well.
She'd been trying to get herself out of some of the day-to-day work, which was absolutely the right thing to do. But the results weren't what she'd hoped for.
Things weren't happening in quite the way she expected, she was having to get involved again, and eventually she'd started taking some of the work back.
Which, of course, left her with exactly the problem she'd been trying to solve in the first place.
We spent some time talking about what had happened.
And one of the questions I asked was what she'd actually agreed with the person when she handed the work over.
What outcome was she expecting?
What standard did the work need to meet?
How would they both know whether it was going well?
And when had they agreed to sit down and review progress?
As we talked it through, it became apparent that quite a lot of this hadn't really been established.
The person had been given responsibility, but not necessarily the clarity or support needed to deliver it successfully.
I find this happens quite often in growing businesses.
The owner has been doing something for years. They know how it works, what matters, where the potential problems are, and what a good result looks like.
Much of that knowledge is in their head.
So when they hand the responsibility to somebody else, they assume that person will approach it with a similar understanding. And when they don't, it's easy to become frustrated.
Sometimes the owner decides the person isn't capable. Sometimes they decide they can't trust them. And quite often they end up taking the work back because it's quicker to do it themselves.
But I think there's a question worth asking before reaching that conclusion.
Did we actually give that person a fair chance to succeed?
One of the biggest reasons I see for underperformance in businesses is a lack of clear expectations.
And I don't just mean telling somebody what their job is.
I mean agreeing what they're accountable for achieving, what standards are expected and how success is going to be measured.
If you ask somebody to take responsibility for customer service, for example, what does that actually mean?
Is it responding to enquiries within a particular timeframe? Resolving complaints without escalation? Maintaining a certain level of customer satisfaction? Keeping customers informed?
There are quite a few ways somebody could interpret the instruction to 'look after customer service'.
Unless you've had the conversation, you might both be working towards quite different ideas of what good looks like.
The same applies to sales, operations, finance or pretty much any other part of the business.
And there's another part of this that I think gets overlooked.
The follow-up.
Sometimes an owner will hand something over, explain what they want, and then disappear until there's a problem.
They think they're giving the person freedom.
But there's a difference between allowing somebody to take ownership and leaving them to work everything out for themselves. Particularly if they're taking on something new.
You need a rhythm of checking in, reviewing what's happening, giving feedback, and dealing with issues before they become bigger problems.
That doesn't mean standing over somebody's shoulder or checking every decision.
It means having enough structure around the responsibility that both people know how things are progressing.
I sometimes hear business owners say they don't want to micromanage.
And I agree. Nobody wants that.
But the alternative to micromanagement isn't no management. It's good management.
Making expectations clear, agreeing the outcomes, putting sensible measures in place, and following through consistently.
And, importantly, giving people the opportunity to develop the capability to do the job properly.
Because somebody might not get everything right first time.
They might need training, support or a chance to work through a few problems themselves.
That's part of developing a team.
In the conversation with my client, one of the interesting things was that she began to question whether the problem was really her confidence in the employee.
Perhaps it was more about her confidence in the way she'd handed the work over.
I thought that was quite an important distinction.
It changes the conversation from 'Why can't this person do what I've asked?' to 'What do I need to put in place to help them take proper ownership?'
Of course, there will still be occasions when somebody isn't right for a role, even with clear expectations and good support. But at least then you're making that judgement on a fair basis.
And you're far less likely to find yourself taking work back simply because the handover wasn't properly managed.
So if you've delegated something recently and you're disappointed with the results, it might be worth revisiting the original conversation.
Did you agree the outcome?
Were the standards clear?
Did you both know how success would be measured?
And have you been following up consistently?
Because if those things weren't in place, I'm not sure you've really given delegation a proper chance.
It's called management.
And it's something every growing business needs to get better at.
If you're finding it difficult to step back from the day-to-day, or you keep having to take work back because things aren't being done as you'd hoped, it might be time to look at how you're managing and developing your team.
Book a call with me and let's explore how you can build a team that takes greater ownership, delivers consistently and gives you more room to focus on growing your business.
P.S. Curious about where your business is thriving and where there's room to improve? Take my Business Success Scorecard to uncover your strengths, identify potential growth areas and discover where to focus next.
