The concept of staff empowerment is often spoken about and even claimed as policy by many organizations. It seems from experience and much I have read that the methods and requirements for implementation of successful staff empowerment programs are often badly misunderstood and/or mismanaged.
I found this five stage model some time ago however cannot find the original reference. If you read this article and know where the model comes from I would greatly appreciate a comment on this post. It is not my intention to go into a long drawn-out thesis on this topic rather to add a quick guide to the steps required to implement an empowerment program and some discussion of the pitfalls.
The Model
motivation
motivation, support
motivation, support, authority
motivation, support, authority, responsibility
motivation, support, authority, responsibility, competence
Motivation
I have said in many articles and blog posts that it is impossible for one person to motivate another as all people are motivated and depending on what is required by their leader they will constantly move either towards or away from a proposed courses of action. Motivation comes from within and is related to tension created by the need to satisfy a craving for an imagined future state or outcome that is seen as desirable to the motivated individual. What most refer to as motivating others is more correctly “inspiring others”. So what does this mean for empowerment programs? If the staff you want to empower can see no personal benefit in being empowered no empowerment can occur. I once saw a hotel chain try to implement an empowerment program in a resort located on a small island in Asia and it failed as the staff were not motivated to be empowered. Their cultural heritage was one of “the chief tells me what and how to do things and I just follow the orders and all responsibility for the outcome is the boss’s”.
The first step in any empowerment process therefore needs to be to ask the workforce if they want to have more authority and responsibility regarding their work. This inquiry must be closely linked to what the likely effect will be on both the organization’s goals, mission and vision and on the perception of the staff as to the increased chances of success or failure of that individual in his or her role. At this point in the process it would perhaps be a good time to consider a range of motivational theories and if working across cultures of course Geert Hofstede’s cultural influence model. (see previous posts and orglearn site) Theories and models can’t give definitive answers as each individual is different however they can give a framework to start to explore the possible motivation issues that may arise.
Support
Assuming the motivation issue has been correctly addressed the next question becomes how much support does the empowering individual need to give. I think the best way to look at this issue is to use the Blanchard and Herschey Situational Leadership model where the leaders style changes with the relevant competences of the follower. For example if you are empowering someone to say, make decisions on an entire process, they are likely to have varying degrees of competence (skills and knowledge when applied to a particular problem) regarding various parts of the process. Obviously if the individual being empowered understands the technical aspects of the process little or no support in that area will be needed. If however an individual has little experience in say, the computer skills, associated paperwork, human relationship area or management requirements then you have a two pronged problem. If you give to this individual ‘too much’ technical support you will cause frustration and obviously too little support in the other relevant areas will also cause difficulty and the empowerment program to fail.
Authority
The process of handing authority over is where many attempts to empower have most difficulty. Even with simple delegation most managers are willing to share responsibility however they are reluctant to hand over their ‘legitimate’ authority. With authority comes power and all that goes with it. Regardless of what many will say those that are in a position to empower others are usually very protective of their own power base. When delegating authority we must work to each person’s strengths and avoid conflicts of interest. I will talk about the “strengths” issue further in competence. Regarding the conflicts of interest, suffice to say anyone who puts as an example a sales manager, who is paid commission, in charge of product costing is heading for disaster. I personally saw this “conflict of interests” situation destroy a small company that had operated successfully for eight years that was then destroyed in six months. Not only was the costing sloppy and inaccurate the sales manager didn’t care too much about the profit on each sale as it was easier for him to sell if he could cut the price. Short term thinking perhaps on the sales managers part however when the situation became difficult he just moved on to the next company. A similar conflict situation it appears has arisen in the worldwide banking and investment industry over more recent times.
There is also the question of how much authority to grant. A good basis to make this decision is that you should ensure that enough authority is given to allow relevant persons to:
Get the work done in a timely and efficient manner
Allow the authorized employees to take initiative if improvements in effectiveness can be achieved and
To keep things operating at least in a normal manner particularly in your absence from the work unit
Responsibility
Remembering that empowerment is not to be confused with regular delegation it is important that those being empowered understand and accept that if they agree to being empowered they also accept responsibility for outcomes. This again is where I believe many empowerment programs fail. Staff will often seek authority however many are unwilling to take on the consequences of their decisions. Empowerment seems to me often to be seen by staff as the right to do things as they see fit, however if it all goes belly up then the stance is, it must be the company’s fault or the bosses fault or someone else’s fault. Typical responses to personal failures can be; the guidelines weren’t correct or another department didn’t do it right or a colleague let them down. If staff are to be empowered they have to understand that they have to make sure that the guidelines suit the tasks they are assigned, that they have to manage inter-department co-operation /operations and that they must through effective teamwork and communication enlist the support of their co-workers.
Competence
I have written a lot about competence over the years and have lead a competence modeling team for a major organization. If you would like to read some of the articles you will find them in past blogs and on the main website.
The technical issues of competence modeling and competence development aside, this final step in the empowerment process is often overlooked. To my way of thinking a mismatch between competence levels and level of empowerment to be granted is a road to disaster. Before you can empower anyone you must closely look at the desired outcomes for the empowerment program you are implementing, analyze the skills and knowledge required and then asses the level of those skills and knowledge in the individuals you are to place your trust in. Detailed instruction and training must then be undertaken to overcome any shortfalls in competence levels before any empowerment can be implemented. The definition I use for competence is “knowledge and skill applied to a particular problem”. It is always a mistake to assume that a person is fully competent. For example if you wanted to empower staff to approve payment terms/loans for your customers you may find that a staff member has a great understanding for wholesalers however little competence in approving terms for small retailers. You would therefore need to give different levels of authority for each market segment. It would also be wise to set up a cross checking system with perhaps another staff member also having to sign off on the retail accounts.
Conclusion: The benefits of empowering staff are well documented and highly desirable. The implementation of empowerment programs however is often fraught with pain and frustration so hopefully the few words above will at least give some readers a skeleton to work with.
