Background conversation:
Rick:
> >"Empowered" means you have the power, not me."
> >If I can empower you, then I can take it away and you are not
> "empowered."
> >Thus, the usual use, "I empower you to..." has a built-in contradiction.
Dave:
>I've written a short paper on this subject, if anyone's interested. It
>addresses Rick's very apt comment:
Rick:
>Hello David -- how short? Could we just publish it here?
Thanks for asking. The paper is included below.
Dave
David E. Birren
Project Manager and Consultant, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
(608) 267-2442
"Teach your tongue to say 'I do not know' and you will progress." --
Maimonides
Empowerment: The Basis for Modern Management
Why is empowerment important?
Management has been described as the art of getting things done through
others. At the enterprise level, management processes and systems enable
an organization to carry out its mission in an organized, integrated and
consistent way. At the level of providing direct customer service,
management involves assuring that customer needs are met consistently and
reliably by those with whom they have direct contact; i.e., with minimal
interference by managers.
The concept of empowerment is based on the fact that those who do the work
know the most about it and the belief that they are capable of making good
judgments about how best to carry it out. Adopting empowerment as the
basis for management is consistent with an emphasis on teams and a
movement toward implementing quality concepts, including systems thinking
and organizational learning. Whatever an organization's management
philosophy is - from militaristic command-and-control to the "virtual
organization" - empowerment opens communication channels, clarifies
organizational roles, and makes work relationships effective and
predictable.
All organizations must listen to the voice of the external customer to be
sure the right outcomes are being created and delivered. Likewise, it is
important to listen to the voice of those who have a stake in
non-production processes; these people are located within the organization
and can be called internal customers. The following model provides a
basis for listening to and using the input of employees at all levels of
an organization in ways that respect their knowledge and promote clear
working relationships.
What's empowerment supposed to do?
-- Clarify roles within the existing organization
-- Provide for feedback links within decision and operational processes
-- Provide a consistent approach to managing at all levels
Some concerns about empowerment
-- What about when the "empowered" person makes a mistake? The organization
must be willing to accept the risk of "blown plays." Honest mistakes are
opportunities to learn, not to punish.
-- Empowerment is no excuse for people behaving illegally or outrageously.
It doesn't change the basic requirements of human interaction.
-- Any organization needs to define empowerment for itself. The existing
culture must be clearly understood in order to know the best places or
methods to introduce any change. And like any lasting change, implementing
empowerment takes time.
Commitment to Empowerment
Co-dependence thrives on supporting people for being ineffective and
helpless. When you are co-dependent you have a secret investment in
people being less than they are, so that you will be able to get away with
being less than you are. . . . When you are for empowerment, you are for
assisting people in multiplying their energy by itself. You are not
forcing them or enabling them to make them more powerful, you are simply
supporting them to make the full use of what they are.
-- Gay Hendricks and Kathlyn Hendricks, Conscious Loving: The Journey to
Co-Commitment
Commitment to Co-Dependence
Ineffectiveness and helplessness thrive on ignorance, which can be either
inadvertent or deliberate. In an environment of empowerment, ignorance is
respected for its great destructive power, and it is combated at every
opportunity. In an environment of co-dependence, ignorance is cultivated
for its power, and it is managed at every opportunity. Shared knowledge
is shared power, while secret knowledge gives the "knower" the power to
manipulate others, which serves those who believe they benefit from
imbalanced relationships. This belief is rooted in a limited perception
of the nature and value of interdependence. It is inherently neurotic
and, ultimately, based on an inner sense of incompetence.
Helplessness begets helplessness.
-- David E. Birren
A Definition of Empowerment
Empowerment (one possible definition): The quality of the relationship
between management and staff characterized by management's providing, and
staff accepting, the authority, responsibility and resources necessary to
perform a complete set of tasks.
Empowerment rests on three basic concepts: direction, freedom and support.
If one is removed, the other two lose their meaning and empowerment no
longer exists.
1. Direction is the charge or mission, the policy statement that tells
the workers what is needed. It includes definitions of desired outcomes,
quality specifications, and enough other information to make it clear what
is to be done.
2. Freedom is the ability of the workers to do the job they have been
given. It includes the latitude to make operational decisions within the
boundaries of the charge, without being second-guessed or undercut by the
managers.
3. Support is providing the resources necessary to do the job. It
includes managers accepting work products and implementing decisions that
are consistent with the direction provided, even if they disagree with the
details or the method.
A Behavioral Implication of Empowerment
Under an empowerment model, providing support means that no decision is
ever reversed without the participation of the person or group who made
the decision in the first place. Not only does this enable the person
considering the reversal to make a better decision by first learning more
about the situation, but it also sends a clear message of trust and
respect. The only exception to this is a bona fide emergency where there
is no time to review the change before it is made. But even then, the
original decision-maker(s) must be involved as soon as possible after the
event; not just informed, but brought into the issue to deal with the
consequences.
A Few Tests of Empowerment
The following questions are offered in the spirit of providing practical
assistance to managers who are serious about sustaining an empowered work
environment.
-- Do those who depend on you for resources feel they have the resources
they need to do their work? If there are insufficient resources to go
around, do they understand the reasons they're short, and do they have the
authority to prioritize their work?
-- Do you change decisions made by those below you? Do people bring these
issues to you? Do they think you'll do something about them? If so, what
is it about your behavior or style that encourages them?
-- Are you willing to listen and humbly act on what you hear without
retribution, shooting the messenger, or exerting control in a way that
diminishes others' proper roles?
-- Do you tend to "circle the wagons" in times of stress, or do you open up
to new information?
-- Do you do, or are you seen as doing, anything else that has the effect of
eroding others' perceptions of the clarity of your shared direction, the
scope of their freedom, or the predictability of your support?
Some concerns about empowerment
-- What about when the "empowered" person makes a mistake? The organization
must be willing to accept the risk of "blown plays." Honest mistakes are
opportunities to learn, not to punish.
-- Empowerment is no excuse for people behaving illegally or outrageously.
Absolutely. It doesn't change the basic requirements of human interaction.
-- Any organization needs to define empowerment for itself. The existing
culture must be clearly understood in order to know the best places or
methods to introduce any change. And like any lasting change, implementing
empowerment takes time.
Role Definitions Under an Empowerment Model
Traditional management theory assigns roles to individuals at different
levels of an organization, with increasing levels of responsibility and
decreasing levels of detail orientation, the higher one goes in the
organization. Briefly, the top level determines overall priorities and
operating parameters; the middle level(s) identifies resources and directs
operational activities; and the front line level develops detailed,
functional solutions based on middle management's translation of
priorities into action plans.
Using a large state agency as an example, the empowerment model could look
like this:
-- Top level (Tier 1): This comprises the Secretary's Office and the
senior management team(s) as a group. Its primary perspective is at the
department (whole organization) level and it is not actively concerned
with the operation of any particular subunit. Its role is to establish
the required needs and priorities of the department as a whole, including
parameters for assuring that the overall agency complies with state
requirements and that there is integration among its elements. For
management system redesign, this mean setting guidelines for the system as
a whole and then backing away from the details.
-- Mid-level (Tier 2): This comprises senior managers such as division
administrators, regional directors and their appropriate management teams,
thus including deputy and assistant administrators, bureau directors, and
regional sub-director-level managers. The primary perspective of these
staff is at the unit (division, region, etc.), rather than the department,
level. Their primary role is that of a linking mechanism between those
providing direction and those doing the work. This level has several
responsibilities:
-- to identify, assemble and structure the right resources;
-- to set the specific direction for the front line workers within
the scope of the divisional and regional environments (translating general
direction into specific guidance);
-- to assure integration by directing that the appropriate
divisions commit adequate resources to issues of a cross-program nature;
and
-- to generalize operational experience into usable feedback at
the top level.
-- Front-line level (Tier 3): This includes bureau directors, section
chiefs, unit leaders, regional supervisors, team leaders, and front-line
staff. Their primary perspective is at the subunit (bureau, section,
local work unit, etc.) level. Their primary role is to develop and carry
out actions that meet the requirements set forth by the first two levels,
using their knowledge of customer needs and internal processes. They have
several responsibilities:
-- to understand priorities and parameters established by the top
level (Tier 1) and operationalized by the middle level (Tier 2);
-- to produce products that meet the requirements established by
the first two levels;
-- to evaluate their work processes and customer needs;
-- to assure that integration with other work units occurs as
needed; and
-- to assure the continued or improved satisfaction of customer
needs.
--"Birren, David E" <BirreD@mail01.dnr.state.wi.us>
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>