Delegation Poker
Also known as:
Delegation Poker
1. Overview
Delegation Poker is a collaborative decision-making tool designed to clarify and agree upon levels of delegation within a team or organization. Its core purpose is to move beyond the binary concept of delegation (either a manager delegates a task or they don’t) and introduce a more nuanced, seven-level spectrum of delegation. This structured approach facilitates a shared understanding of authority and responsibility, empowering teams while maintaining appropriate levels of managerial oversight. The pattern was created and popularized by Jurgen Appelo as part of the Management 3.0 framework, a comprehensive model for agile leadership and management. Appelo developed Delegation Poker to address the common problem of ambiguity and misalignment regarding decision-making authority in both traditional and agile environments. This lack of clarity often leads to micromanagement, bottlenecks, and decreased employee engagement, as team members are unsure of the scope of their autonomy.
In the context of commons-aligned value creation, Delegation Poker offers a powerful mechanism for operationalizing principles of distributed governance and shared ownership. By making the process of delegation transparent and participatory, it fosters a culture of trust and mutual accountability. This is particularly relevant for commons-based enterprises, where decision-making is often distributed among community members rather than centralized in a hierarchical structure. The pattern enables a clear and explicit distribution of authority, ensuring that decisions are made at the most appropriate level and that all stakeholders have a voice in defining the boundaries of their autonomy. This not only improves operational efficiency but also strengthens the social fabric of the commons by promoting a sense of collective ownership and responsibility.
2. Core Principles
-
Delegation is a Spectrum, Not a Binary Choice: The fundamental principle of Delegation Poker is that delegation exists on a continuum. The seven levels of delegation provide a language for teams to discuss and define the precise degree of authority being delegated, moving beyond a simple “yes” or “no” approach.
-
Clarity and Transparency are Paramount: The process is designed to make delegation levels explicit and visible to everyone on the team. This transparency eliminates confusion and ensures that both managers and team members have a shared understanding of their respective roles and responsibilities.
-
Context-Dependent Delegation: The appropriate level of delegation is not static; it depends on the specific context, the maturity of the team, and the nature of the task or decision. Delegation Poker encourages a flexible approach, allowing for different levels of delegation for different situations.
-
Empowerment Through Controlled Self-Organization: The goal is to empower teams by giving them as much autonomy as they can handle. However, this empowerment is not absolute. It is a controlled form of self-organization, where managers still play a crucial role in setting boundaries and providing guidance.
-
Collaborative and Participatory Decision-Making: The act of playing Delegation Poker is a collaborative exercise. It brings the team together to discuss and agree upon delegation levels, fostering a sense of shared ownership over the decision-making process.
3. Key Practices
- The Seven Levels of Delegation: The core of the practice is the use of the seven levels of delegation, which are typically represented on cards:
- Level 1: Tell: The manager makes the decision and communicates it to the team.
- Level 2: Sell: The manager makes the decision and then persuades the team to accept it.
- Level 3: Consult: The manager seeks input from the team before making the decision.
- Level 4: Agree: The manager and the team make the decision together through consensus.
- Level 5: Advise: The team makes the decision, but the manager provides advice and input.
- Level 6: Inquire: The team makes the decision, and the manager inquires about the outcome afterward.
- Level 7: Delegate: The manager fully delegates the decision to the team.
-
The Delegation Poker Game: The game itself is a structured process for discussing and agreeing upon delegation levels. Team members play cards to indicate their preferred level of delegation for a specific task or decision area. The differences in the cards played then spark a conversation about the reasoning behind each choice.
-
The Delegation Board: The outcomes of the Delegation Poker game are made visible on a Delegation Board. This board lists key decision areas and the agreed-upon level of delegation for each, serving as a constant reference point for the team.
-
The Rule of the Highest and Lowest Minority: To encourage a bias towards empowerment while avoiding chaos, some teams use a rule where the highest and lowest minority votes are discarded. This helps to moderate extreme positions and find a more balanced level of delegation.
- Iterative and Dynamic Process: The Delegation Board is not a static document. It should be reviewed and updated regularly to reflect the team’s growing maturity and the changing context of their work. As the team becomes more capable, the level of delegation can be increased.
4. Implementation
Implementing Delegation Poker involves a straightforward, step-by-step process. First, the manager or team facilitator identifies a set of key decision areas where the level of delegation needs to be clarified. These could range from technical decisions, such as architectural choices, to process-related decisions, like how the team runs its daily stand-up meetings. The next step is to gather the team and explain the seven levels of delegation. Each team member is given a set of cards, each representing one of the seven levels. For each decision area, the facilitator describes the scenario, and then each team member privately selects the card that represents the level of delegation they believe is most appropriate.
Once everyone has chosen a card, all cards are revealed simultaneously. The differences in the chosen levels provide the basis for a structured discussion. The individuals who chose the highest and lowest levels are asked to explain their reasoning. This conversation is the heart of the process, as it allows the team to explore different perspectives and assumptions. The goal is to reach a consensus on the appropriate level of delegation for that specific decision area. Once an agreement is reached, the result is recorded on a Delegation Board, which is a visual representation of the team’s delegation policies. This board should be prominently displayed in the team’s workspace to serve as a constant reminder of the agreed-upon levels of authority.
5. 7 Pillars Assessment
| Pillar | Score (1-5) | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| Purpose | 4 | Delegation Poker strongly aligns with the purpose of empowering individuals and teams, a core tenet of commons-based value creation. It provides a practical tool for distributing authority and fostering a sense of ownership. |
| Governance | 5 | The pattern directly addresses governance by providing a clear and transparent framework for decision-making. It enables a more distributed and participatory form of governance, which is essential for a healthy commons. |
| Culture | 4 | By promoting open discussion and collaboration, Delegation Poker helps to cultivate a culture of trust, transparency, and mutual accountability. It encourages a shift away from a command-and-control mindset towards a more empowering and collaborative one. |
| Incentives | 3 | While the pattern itself does not include explicit financial incentives, it does create intrinsic rewards by giving team members more autonomy and control over their work. This can lead to increased motivation and engagement. |
| Knowledge | 4 | The process of playing Delegation Poker is a form of knowledge sharing, as team members learn about each other’s perspectives and assumptions. The Delegation Board also serves as a form of codified knowledge, making the team’s governance model explicit. |
| Technology | 3 | While Delegation Poker is primarily a social technology, it can be supported by digital tools such as online whiteboards and virtual card decks. These tools can be particularly useful for distributed teams. |
| Resilience | 4 | By clarifying decision-making authority and empowering teams, Delegation Poker can increase the resilience of an organization. It enables faster and more effective decision-making, particularly in complex and dynamic environments. |
| Overall | 4.0 | Delegation Poker is a highly effective pattern for fostering a commons-aligned culture of distributed governance and shared ownership. Its primary strength lies in its ability to make the process of delegation transparent, participatory, and context-dependent. |
6. When to Use
- When a new team is being formed and needs to establish clear decision-making processes.
- When there is confusion or conflict within a team about who has the authority to make certain decisions.
- When a manager wants to empower their team but is unsure how to do so in a controlled and gradual way.
- When an organization is transitioning to a more agile or self-organizing way of working.
- When a team is geographically distributed and needs to have explicit agreements about decision-making.
7. Anti-Patterns and Gotchas
- Using it as a one-time exercise: The Delegation Board should be a living document that is regularly reviewed and updated.
- Ignoring the conversation: The real value of Delegation Poker is in the conversation, not just the act of playing the cards. Don’t rush the discussion.
- The manager imposing their will: If the manager uses the process to simply impose their own preferred level of delegation, it will undermine the purpose of the exercise.
- Lack of follow-through: The agreed-upon delegation levels must be respected in practice. If the manager continues to micromanage, the team will lose trust in the process.
- Applying the same level of delegation to everything: The level of delegation should be context-dependent. Not all decisions are created equal.