By Stephanie Hunt
The problem is not always a lack of initiative
“I gave them the assignment. I expected them to figure it out.” I have heard variations of that sentence from well-intentioned leaders. I understand the instinct. We want people to take ownership, solve problems, and become less dependent on us. But handing someone a task is not the same as giving them a decision they are equipped to own.
A capable person can still struggle when the intended outcome is vague, the boundaries are invisible, or the leader has information that was never shared. The resulting delay or rework may be labeled a performance problem when the underlying issue is an incomplete handoff.
The opposite approach is not better. If a leader specifies every step, checks every choice, and overrides every different method, the employee learns to wait for direction. Neither extreme builds independent judgment.
Use a five-part decision brief before stepping back
Before delegating consequential work, make five things explicit. The conversation can take five minutes for a routine decision or a longer briefing for a complex assignment.
1. Outcome: What result matters, and why? Name the customer, mission, quality, or safety requirement the work must protect. Separate the required result from your preferred method.
2. Authority: What can the person decide independently? What needs consultation or approval? A statement such as “you own this” is not enough if the boundaries are still in your head.
3. Context: What constraints, stakeholders, dependencies, or past lessons should inform the decision? Share the information you would want if you were making the call.
4. Escalation: What would trigger a return conversation? Define the risks, deadlines, cost thresholds, or changes in assumptions that require the leader to reengage.
5. Review: When will you discuss progress and reasoning? Choose a checkpoint that supports the person without reclaiming ownership.
A practical example: delegate the decision, not just the deliverable
Imagine a manager asks a team lead to design a readiness workshop. A weak handoff is, “Put together the workshop and send me the slides.” A controlling handoff is a detailed script prescribing every activity.
A stronger handoff sounds like this: “The workshop must help participants identify three coordination gaps and agree on owners for next steps. You can choose the agenda and facilitation method. Include operations and partner representatives, stay within the approved budget, and bring me back in if the scope expands or a stakeholder dispute changes the objective. Let’s review your reasoning and outline on Thursday.”
The leader has defined success, authority, context, escalation, and a review point. The team lead still has room to think.
The leader’s responsibility after the handoff
Once the decision space is clear, resist the urge to intervene simply because the person takes a different route. Ask what they are optimizing for, what evidence they are using, and what could change their assessment. If a decision introduces unacceptable risk, intervene directly and explain why. But do not confuse personal preference with a nonnegotiable requirement.
When something goes wrong, examine both sides of the handoff. Did the person act within the agreed boundaries? Were the constraints realistic? Was the escalation trigger clear? Did the leader provide the promised support? Accountability belongs to both the person accepting the work and the person setting the conditions for success.
What team members can do to make delegation work
The person receiving the assignment does not have to wait passively for clarity. Ask: “What does a successful outcome look like?” “Which decisions are mine?” “What would make you want an update sooner?” “Are there constraints or relationships I may not know about?”
Then restate the agreement in your own words. A brief note—“I will decide A and B, consult you on C, and flag any delay affecting the deadline”—can prevent days of avoidable confusion. Bring options and your reasoning to checkpoints, not only a request for the leader’s preferred answer.
Try a one-week delegation experiment
Choose one recurring decision that currently returns to you more often than it should. Write a five-part decision brief and discuss it with the person who will own the next decision. At the first checkpoint, ask three questions: What did you decide? What information or authority was missing? What would make the next handoff clearer?
Do not measure success only by whether the result matches what you would have done. Look for better reasoning, earlier escalation of real risk, fewer avoidable approvals, and greater confidence on both sides.
Autonomy is not the absence of leadership. It is the result of leadership that creates a usable frame for independent action.
Continue the conversation
Related HSS reading: How to Develop Leadership Judgment Without Creating Dependency — https://huntstrategicsolutions.com/post/develop-leadership-judgment-without-creating-dependency/
Explore HSS executive and corporate advisory support — https://huntstrategicsolutions.com/executive-corporate-advisory/