Allocating Work Rôles |
|
On digestion of this outline, you should be able to:
|
|
|
Delegation |
assignment of responsibility & authority |
|
duty to perform a task or duty; can be delegated |
|
|
moral obligation to perform a task or duty: cannot be delegated |
|
|
the right to give orders and expect to be followed; the right to perform tasks without superior permission |
|
|
Functional authority |
temporary, whilst working outside one's normal area eg, as a member of a project team |
|
Job description - |
a written statement -what is done, why and how |
|
Job specification |
minimum acceptable personal qualities & qualifications of an incumbent |
|
Line relationship |
chain of command - who orders whom and who obeys whom |
|
Staff relationship |
advice and consultancy - no power to order changes |
|
Span of control |
number of subordinates who can be controlled effieciently & efectively |
|
Unity of command |
one boss per person |
Chief executives are responsible for the overall activities of an
Qualifications and experience, suitability and eligibility
Normal selection criteria look at
whereas person description [job specification] for job looks at

Surprise fits are often found by accident and are few in number; tend to stay because they are surprised, and are ineligible for like jobs outside their present employment. [I cannot remember when I first used this diagram - but suspect I now have the positions for Surprise Fits and Poor Fits reversed - what do you think?]
Eligibility can always be improved through training. The most eligible are often over-rated whereas the most suitable are seldom recognised.
Qualities of improvers [new appointees] were seen by supervisors as
Non-improvers were seen as
Factors were not equal in frequency.
Those who get on tend to be those who self-manage and who are aware of their rôle relationships - not the technically able. Successful teams and individuals are aware of their strengths, avoid areas where they cannot compete, and adopt compensating strategies.
Do not be forced into maintaining a rôle which is not yours.
Changing nature of job market - jobs not so well defined, job descriptions change regularly, managers are more volatile
Nature of legal changes - employers cannot afford to make selection mistakes.
Growing emphasis on behaviour - personality fit.
Unity of command implies one boss per person.
Authority should run in a chain, or line from the chief executive downwards.

Functions and responsibilities of each level must be dissected in each subordinate position and worked out in more detail; ie, all general responsibilities of CEO must be covered somewhere by someone, and no one can have a task which is not a dissection of someone further up the chain [see Outline 14]
The CEO can delegate her responsibilities, but not her accountability [to Board, shareholders, whatever] - as can every manager below her. If a particular task is broken down and constantly delegated until it ends up with the floorsweeper, she/he is ultimately responsible for seeing that the task is carried out - but each delegator remains accountable to the higher level for seeing that it is done - ie, if the CEO finds the floor dirty, she should ask her deputy to account for it - she in turn will ask the next level manager and so on. The CEO should not directly abuse the floorsweeper, nor should the various managers try to wipe their hands of it by saying - I passed it on to manager xyz.
Each level of management should be given the authority as well as the responsibility to carry out the delegated task. At the end of the line, the floorsweeper should be allowed to draw necessary stores such as a broom without having to seek superior permission - filling in 15 forms in triplicate?
Project teams
Belbin's Team Rôle Descriptions
Somewhat like a Myers-Briggs test, people can complete questions which reveal the rôle for which they would be best suited, and Belbin [see bibliography] argues that we all fit into a dominant and a secondary rôle. Table shows rôle name, strength of contribution in that rôle, & allowable weaknesses.
Executives rarely strong in all rôles - need to find complementary types to make an effective team. Without doing any tests, you may be able to see yourself or others herein - but don't take it too seriously without further detailed analysis of what Belbin says.
Plant Creative, imaginative, unorthodox, solves
difficult problems Ignores details, too pre-occupied to
communicate effectively Resource Investigator Extrovert, enthusiast, communicative,
explores opportunities, develops contacts Overoptimistic, loses interest
quickly Co-ordinator Mature, confident, good chair, clarifies
goals, promotes decision-making, delegates well. Can be seen as manipulative, delegates
personal work. Shaper Challenging, dynamic, thrives on
pressure, has drive and courage to overcome
obstacles. Can provoke others, hurt
feelings Monitor evaluator Sober, strategic and discerning, sees all
options, judges accurately. Lacks drive and ability to inspire
others, overly critical. Teamworker Co-operative, mild, perceptive,
diplomatic; listens, builds, averts friction,
calms. Indecisive in crunch situations, can be
easily influenced. Implementer Disciplined, reliable, conservative,
efficient, turns ideas into practical actions. Somewhat inflexible, slow to respond to
new possibilities Completer Painstaking, conscientious, anxious,
searches out errors and omissions, delivers on
time Inclined to worry unduly, reluctant to
delegate, can be a nitpicker. Specialist Singleminded, self starting, dedicated,
provides knowledge and skills in rare supply. Contributes on only a narrow front,
dwells on technicalities, overlooks the big
picture.
Make sure
Be wary if
Strained relations
Sometimes, members of a team do not get on as well as they should, or you, the manager, have problems with one of the members. Belbin sees 3 groups, symbolised by:
Need to look for strengths of each party -
perhaps by examining weaknesses andassuming in good faith that negatives also have their positive sides.
Need to try to find mutual rôle recognition - as this may be missing or obscured, for one or both.
Need for one to move to a secondary rôle which is more manageable but probably only a temporary solution.
Introduction of a third party may help - may also disrupt a working relationship.
Steps to Success
Casting director needs to put right people in right jobs - often falls to CEO or another senior executive - hence need for them to be well trained. Use of computer-assisted typing of team rôles - vastly expensive but worthwhile. In smaller organisations, casting director will need broad vision.
Go back to Outline 3 - Motivation & Job Satisfaction