Delegation Level

A delegation level describes how much authority has been assigned for a defined decision area between specified parties. Management 3.0’s Delegation Poker provides a seven-level vocabulary for discussing that agreement. It treats delegation as gradual and dependent on context, rather than a choice between total control and total freedom. In this explanation, the manager delegates to an engineer or team, though the relationship can also be between other parties.

1. Tell: The manager decides and communicates the decision.
2. Sell: The manager decides and explains the reasoning to seek support.
3. Consult: The manager seeks the team’s input, then decides.
4. Agree: The manager and team make the decision together.
5. Advise: The manager offers advice; the team decides.
6. Inquire: The team decides; the manager asks about the decision afterward.
7. Delegate: The team handles the decision without the manager participating in that individual choice, within the delegated scope.

The distinctions concern participation in the decision. At level three, the manager seeks input and decides; at level five, the manager advises and the team decides. Level four requires a joint decision, while level six leaves the decision to the team and provides for inquiry afterward. Level seven removes the manager’s involvement in the individual choice within the agreed scope; it does not waive organizational constraints or separate approvals. Specify the reporting arrangements and exception triggers rather than assuming a level fixes a universal deadline.

Per decision area, and what goes wrong without it

A delegation board records decision areas and their agreed levels for the parties concerned. A person can have different authority for a local tool choice, a shared-interface proposal, and a cutover date. A valid assignment by someone holding the relevant authority establishes a decision right; writing a label alone does not create it. If one project spans several areas, separate the decisions and identify the necessary approvals or escalate an unclear overlap. An advice process can add a separately agreed requirement to seek input from affected people and experts. That requirement is not automatically implied by levels five or six. The entry on responsibility and accountability explains why performing work and holding release authority are separate assignments.

In a fictional broker migration, a manager announced full delegation without clarifying the release window or partner commitments. The engineer learned of a peak-season freeze only when the plan was reversed six weeks later. That exposes an unclear agreement, but the level label alone cannot establish whether every proposed action was authorized or every reversal justified. A new risk or a decision outside the delegated scope may require intervention; simply disliking a permitted choice is different. Explain who can intervene, why, and how commitments will be repaired. Review the agreement as capability, risk, reversibility, and constraints change. Evidence of good judgment can support more delegation, but a mature team can appropriately retain the same level. The broader management practices are illustrated in Fully Delegated, Then Overruled.

References

• Management 3.0, Delegation Poker and Delegation Board