Delegation has long been considered a hallmark of effective leadership. It’s a skill taught early, often framed as the antidote to micromanagement, a strategy to lighten a leader’s load and ensure that the right people are handling the right tasks. But as we refine our iNGAGEMENT© Model, which focuses on cultivating high-quality employee and community engagement, it’s becoming increasingly clear that delegation might actually work against the very principles of motivation and engagement.
Let’s break this down.
The Traditional View of Delegation
At its core, delegation is the practice of assigning tasks or responsibilities to others so the leader can focus on more “central” leadership activities. The logic behind it makes sense—leaders can’t (and shouldn’t) do everything, and learning to delegate is a key developmental milestone for many leaders. Early in leadership training, we teach delegation as a way to minimize overburdening oneself and to trust others to execute tasks effectively.
Sounds great, right? Except delegation, by its very nature, imposes responsibility onto others rather than aligning it with their intrinsic motives, values, or purpose.
The Hidden Problem with Delegation
In our work on motivation, we emphasize the importance of aligning tasks and duties with an individual’s intrinsic drive. When someone is forced into an activity without ownership or a personal connection to it, engagement diminishes. Delegation, no matter how well-intended, often ignores this fundamental truth.
Consider how we think about advice. Advice is only valuable when the recipient is open to receiving it. Research suggests that unsolicited advice—no matter how helpful—can actually diminish intrinsic motivation. The same principle applies to delegation. If we simply hand off tasks based on what is convenient or logical for the leader, rather than aligning with what truly motivates the employee, we risk disengagement.
A Shift from Delegation to Alignment
This realization requires a fundamental shift in how we think about task management in leadership. Instead of delegating, we should focus on aligning work with people’s motivations, skills, and personal aspirations. This means moving away from a mindset of “Who can take this off my plate?” and instead asking, “Who would find value and purpose in owning this responsibility?”
When leadership evolves beyond its early stages, the practice of delegation must evolve, too. Instead of treating it as a tool for efficiency, we should see it as an opportunity to facilitate engagement by ensuring that tasks are assigned in a way that fuels motivation and investment.
What This Means for Engagement
At its highest level, engagement isn’t about compliance—it’s about buy-in. When we impose tasks through delegation, we may unintentionally violate an individual’s internal motives, reducing their ownership over the work. Shifting our focus to alignment ensures that people aren’t just completing tasks—they’re investing in them.
As we continue rolling out our iNGAGEMENT© Model (https://blackriverpm.com/models/), you’ll hear us emphasize a shift from managing to facilitating. This is more than just semantics—it’s about reshaping how we think about leadership. Leaders, at times, are simply managers of tasks, and task management alone does not build true engagement. If we want to foster a culture of intrinsic motivation and high-quality engagement, we must rethink the role of delegation in leadership.
The goal isn’t just to get work done. The goal is to ensure the work matters—to the people doing it and the organization as a whole.