The purpose of this paper is to provide a systematic literature review (cf. Tranfield et al., 2003) of previous studies on delegation and to outline an agenda with propositions for future research of delegation. In an interview on her views on and experience of delegation, an experienced manager described delegation as being different things. Everything, from a formal delegation which is often done in writing where a task or responsibility and authority over certain issues are handed over to a co-worker, to the everyday tasks or issues ending up on the manager’s desk which they hand over to a co-worker to perform, solve or investigate, is called delegation. According to the manager, between these extremes are several different sub-categories. The manager also underlined that there are great differences between how the different types of delegation are performed and managed. In previous research, however, delegation has mainly been studied as a formal phenomenon, usually being described as one form of decision making (e.g. Yukl and Fu, 1999; Vroom and Yetton, 1973; Vroom and Jago, 1974, 1978) regarding how responsibility, decision-making power and authority could be dispersed in the organization. To define delegation Mintzberg (2009: 60pp) describes delegation by making an important distinction by, like the manager above, dividing what is usually termed delegation into two, design and delegation. In his model, design is the formal part of delegation which is related to organizational charts and is about how authority and responsibility are divided into organization structures. The Mintzberg-defined delegation emphasizes the mundane activities of managing ad hoc tasks or issues to subordinates for them to solve or sort out (Mintzberg, 2009). These are the issues landing on the managers’ desk which they for some reason need someone else to manage. Furthermore, most studies are viewing delegation as one extreme on a continuum of participation in decision making where on the other end autocratic leadership is found (Schriesheim and Neider, 1989). This builds on the idea that the manager’s different leadership styles determine whether they use autocratic or participating/delegating leadership (Leana, 1987). Whereas different leadership styles are important, a basic premise, however, is that all managers delegate to their subordinates and that it does not matter whether they are autocratic, transformational, or transactional leaders (Bass, 2008). The need for and practice of delegation is always there. They all probably have different reasons for delegating butthe result of the delegation is in practical terms the same, i.e., the managers give their subordinates responsibility and the authority needed to perform a task that is usually under the managers’ responsibility (Yukl, 2010). With this transfer comes the duty to act, either the acting is to solve a task or to decide. Leana (1986) argues that there might be differences between different kinds of delegation implying a need for a new research focus. In line with Mintzberg (2009), she (Leana, 1987) calls for empirical research that embraces both the formal and the mundane aspects of the act of delegating. To fruitfully respond to this call, we need to understand the different types of delegation. In the literature review presented it will be shown that resent studies on delegation covers different aspects of, and/or types of, delegation. Coming from Managerial behavior (Carlson, 1951; Mintzberg, 1973) and Practice (Schatzki, 2001) perspectives, suggestions on how these different kinds of delegation should or could be studied will be presented and discussed.
2022.
20th International Studying Leadership Conference, University of Sussex Business School, Brighton, UK, December 11-13, 2022