Delegate Without Automatically Rescuing
Where you are: Module 6 · Lesson 22 of 30 · about 26 minutes (reading 12, video 2, practice 12). This lesson starts a module about how you respond as a manager. It works on your own reaction when you hand work over, and on a short plan that keeps the work with its owner unless the facts give a reason to step in.
What you'll be able to do
- Write a five-line delegation plan: outcome, authority, scheduled check-in, early signs, and your response to a material new risk.
- Keep the check-in, and treat silence as unknown, not as progress or as a problem.
- Choose the smallest response the facts support: leave the work with its owner, step in on one part, or (rarely) take over.
- Name your own pull to take work back, in one hedged line about yourself.
What the sources give
This module works on your own reaction and your own plan. It never decides what a colleague is like, and nothing in it is a basis for an employment decision.
- Chestnut and Paes (2021) end each type chapter with actions for readers who identify with that type. The Type 1 list includes: "Be less responsible. Take on fewer duties as urgent priorities and reduce your tendency to micromanage and be excessively detail-oriented." The Type 8 list includes: "Stop overprotecting people in your life and doing too much for them. If you see others as weak or fragile, they may not develop their own strength." The authors name taking on too much as a pattern for some readers. We do not use these lines to say that you, or anyone you manage, belongs to a type.
- Riso and Hudson (1996) write: "there is no easy, automatic way to diagnose either yourself or others." So this lesson never asks you to guess what an owner is like.
Our reading. None of these gives a method for delegating. The plan, the rules and the three responses below are this course's own design, and they are untested.
The delegation plan (our design)
Before you hand work over, write five lines.
- Outcome: what finished looks like, and the real deadline.
- Authority: what the owner decides alone, and what stays with you.
- Scheduled check-in: the day and time, and what the owner brings.
- Early signs: what the owner tells you at once, such as "a part is blocked" or "I will miss the deadline".
- Response to a material new risk: what you do if you learn a serious fact before any sign arrives.
A material new risk is a new fact that threatens the outcome, the deadline or the owner's authority: a shorter deadline, a person who becomes unavailable, a missing access right. Doubt, nerves and "I would do it differently" are not.
Three rules about check-ins
- A scheduled check-in is part of the agreement. Holding it is not taking the work back.
- Silence is unknown. If no sign has arrived, you know only that no sign has arrived. It shows neither progress nor a problem. The check-in is when you find out.
- A material new risk can justify earlier contact, help or a decision by you. Earlier contact is a question, such as "What do you need?". It is not a takeover.
Three responses
Choose the smallest one the facts support.
| Response | What the facts must show | What stays with the owner |
|---|---|---|
| Leave it, and keep the check-in | No new reason, or a risk the owner can handle | All of the work |
| Step in on the part that needs you | One part needs something only you can give: an approval, a decision, access | Everything else |
| Take over completely (rare) | The real deadline leaves no time, and the owner cannot do the work | Nothing, so tell the owner why |
The pattern to notice
Taking the work back with no new reason in the facts is the pattern to notice. A reason in the facts is a decision. A pull is not a reason. Ask yourself: "What new fact have I learned since the handover?" If the answer is none, keep the check-in. If there may be a reason you cannot see, you ask. You do not guess what the owner is like.
Your own pull. Use the question from Lesson 7, "What am I trying to protect?". Write one hedged line about yourself, such as "I may be protecting…", and one line on what taking the work back with no new reason would look like for you. If you do not notice this pull, "not here" is a complete answer.
Worked example
Adel leads a stores team at a catering company. On Sunday at 9.00 a.m. he hands Shahad the weekly supplies order.
| Line | Adel's plan |
|---|---|
| Outcome | "Next week's order, checked against the stock sheet, sent to the supplier by Wednesday 2.00 p.m. The supplier's cut-off is Wednesday 3.00 p.m." |
| Authority | "Shahad chooses between the two approved suppliers and orders up to 4,000 riyals. Above 4,000 needs my signature." |
| Check-in | "Tuesday 1.00 p.m., 15 minutes, with the draft order." |
| Early signs | "Tell me the same day if a supplier is out of an item or the total is near 4,000." |
| Material new risk | "If I learn a fact that threatens the order, I contact Shahad that day and ask what she needs. The order stays hers unless the facts say otherwise." |
Three separate versions of the week:
- No new fact. On Monday at 4.00 p.m. Adel has heard nothing. The draft is not due until Tuesday. Nothing has changed, so he keeps the check-in. If he opens the order sheet and starts typing, that is the pattern to notice.
- The owner brings a new fact. At the check-in, Shahad's draft is 4,350 riyals, because the cheaper supplier is out of two items. The part that needs Adel is the signature. He signs, and the rest stays with her.
- A material new risk arrives without a sign. On Monday Adel learns that the supplier has moved its cut-off to Tuesday 3.00 p.m. Shahad does not know. He tells her now, asks "What do you need to finish by Tuesday?", and offers to move the check-in earlier. The order stays with her.
Adel's private note: "My pull: to have it done so I do not have to wait and not know. I hold this loosely." What he cannot say: that Shahad is slow, or what kind of person she is.
Watch: Delegate without automatically rescuing
The video follows Rasha, who runs operations at a distribution company, and her analyst Wael on the morning a weekly summary is due. As you watch, notice:
- what Rasha starts to do at 10.15 a.m. when she has heard nothing, and what that costs;
- what she learns at the 11.00 a.m. check-in when she asks one question;
- which single part she takes on herself, and what stays with Wael.
The lesson teaches the same points in text, so it is complete without the video.
Your turn
Work in your private coaching record (Lesson 6). Nothing here is sent anywhere.
On Sunday at 9.00 a.m. Maha hands Hana the duty roster for the week that starts next Sunday. The roster must be shown to the team by next Sunday at 8.00 a.m. That is the real deadline. Hana decides who works which shift, and every shift must be covered. She may swap shifts between team members. She may not approve leave: Maha's manager approves leave. They agree a check-in on Thursday at 10.00 a.m.
- Write the plan. Write Maha's five lines. Lines 1 to 3 come from the facts. Write lines 4 and 5 yourself. For line 5, say what Maha does if on Monday at 2.00 p.m. her manager tells her that two of the team will be on approved leave next week, and Hana has said nothing.
- Judge two versions of Tuesday. For each, say whether the facts support stepping in, choose a response and give a reason. Version 1: at 10.00 a.m. Maha has heard nothing since Sunday and nothing else has changed. Her note: "It is Tuesday and I have heard nothing. I will do it myself so it is done." She opens the roster file and finishes it. Version 2: at 10.00 a.m. Hana tells Maha that her login cannot open the roster in the scheduling system. Only IT can give access, and IT needs Maha's approval.
- Your own pull (private). Write "I may be protecting…" for when you feel the pull to take work back, or "not here". Add one line on what taking it back with no new reason would look like for you.
Check your work
One good plan:
- Outcome: "Next week's roster, every shift covered, shown to the team by next Sunday at 8.00 a.m."
- Authority: "Hana decides who works which shift and may swap shifts. Leave is my manager's decision."
- Check-in: "Thursday at 10.00 a.m. Hana shows the draft."
- Early signs: "Hana tells me the same day if a shift cannot be covered, if she needs a decision about leave, or if she cannot get into the system."
- Material new risk: "A serious fact I learn first goes to Hana the same day, as a question: what does she need?" For Monday: Maha tells Hana about the two approved leaves and asks what she needs. The roster and the check-in stay as agreed.
The two versions:
- Version 1: no. Nothing new has happened, and silence is unknown. Leave it with Hana and keep the Thursday check-in (one short question such as "Anything you need before Thursday?" is also fine). Finishing the roster herself is the pattern to notice.
- Version 2: yes, for one part. Maha approves the access request. The roster stays with Hana, and so does the check-in. The part that needs Maha is the approval, not the roster.
Your answer meets the criteria if the plan names the real deadline and who decides what; the check-in is kept; silence is unknown; a new fact leads to the smallest response that fits; and nothing is said about what kind of person Hana is. "No contact until Thursday, whatever happens" fails: it ignores the Monday leave. "Hana is probably a Six" fails: it types a colleague from silence. Your own lines pass if the pull is about you, with "may", and names something you would see yourself do.
Extra practice (optional)
Najla leads a back-office team at a pharmacy. On Monday she hands Qais the monthly expiry-date check of 120 stock lines. The chief pharmacist signs the finished check on Thursday at 12.00 noon. Only Najla may mark a line "discard". The check-in is Tuesday at 2.00 p.m. Choose a response for each separate event:
- A. Monday 4.00 p.m., no news. Najla's note: "I will do the first 40 lines tonight, so I know it is safe."
- B. Tuesday 9.00 a.m., the chief pharmacist moves the signing to Wednesday noon. Qais does not know.
- C. At the check-in, Qais has done 70 lines. Nine are past their date, and he cannot mark them "discard".
Key: A, leave it and keep the check-in: doing 40 lines is still taking work back with no new reason. B, earlier contact: a shorter deadline is a material new risk, so she tells Qais now and asks what he needs, without assuming his progress. C, step in on the nine lines only, because only she may mark them "discard"; the rest stays with Qais. None of the three calls for a full takeover.
Knowledge check
Which statement about a scheduled check-in is accurate?
Two days after a handover, a manager has heard nothing, and nothing else has changed. What does the silence tell her?
Which set of facts best supports taking over completely?
Answers explained
- B. A check-in is agreed in advance and is how you find out. A drops the agreement. C removes the early signs the plan relies on. D confuses a planned meeting with a takeover.
- D. Silence shows neither progress nor trouble. A guesses a motive no fact supports. B and C each read a meaning into the silence.
- A. No time is left and the owner cannot do the work. B is unease, and stepping in on the late part would be smaller. C asks for help with one part. D is a preference for speed.
Key takeaways
- A delegation plan has five lines: outcome with the real deadline, authority, a scheduled check-in, early signs, and your response to a material new risk.
- Holding a scheduled check-in is not taking the work back. Silence is unknown. Earlier contact is a question, not a takeover.
- Choose the smallest response the facts support. Taking work back with no new reason in the facts is the pattern to notice.
- Name your pull as your own, with "may", never as a fact about a colleague. The plan and the responses are this course's design, not a tested method.
Sources
- Chestnut, B. and Paes, U. (2021) The Enneagram Guide to Waking Up. Hampton Roads. PDF pages 33 to 34 (the Type 1 list of actions) and PDF pages 228 to 229 (the Type 8 list), quoted from the text layer of the original PDF. PDF page numbers are used, not printed numbers. The lines are advice to readers who identify with those types; this course does not use them to type anyone.
- Riso, D. R. with Hudson, R. (1996) Personality Types: Using the Enneagram for Self-Discovery (revised edition). Houghton Mifflin. PDF page 70, quoted from the text layer. Other passages on people at particular Levels who do not delegate (PDF pages 334 and 413) are not used, because they would invite labelling a colleague.
- This course's own design: the five-line plan, the three rules about check-ins, the three responses, the pattern to notice, and the cases of Adel, Maha, Najla and, in the video, Rasha and Wael (fictional). No source cited for this lesson gives a delegation method or reports a tested result. That statement is about the sources cited, not about every source.