The principle of clarity of delegation also implies defining in clear terms the horizontal and vertical relationships of the position of each subordinate to other position in the organization. Every subordinate must know what position in the organizational structure exists at his own level and how his position fits in the overall management hierarchy.
Every manager in an organization must know who are his subordinates and who are his higher-ups in the organization. This helps him both in seeking guidance and also in providing guidance in terms of scalar chain established in the organization.
Specific written delegations help both the manager and the recipient of authority. However, as one goes up the echelons of organizational structure, such specific delegations become more and more difficult.
The principle of clarity should not be taken to mean that authority relations between the subordinates and the seniors once established become immutable. With the change in the work, authority delegation should be adequately modified.
2. Delegation to be Consistent with Results Expected:
Before proceeding with actual delegation of authority to a subordinate, a manager should know the jobs and results expected of such delegation. Only that much of authority, which is sufficient to accomplish the results, should be delegated.
This principle reasons the assumption that goals are set, plans are made and that jobs are set up to accomplish or implement them. This principle also helps minimizing the dangers of delegating too much or inadequate authority.
3. Responsibility cannot be delegated:
Obligation to accomplish the assigned task is absolute and is not partitioned when authority is delegated to the subordinate. The chief executive even after delegation remains accountable to the Board of Directors for management and supervision of the whole of the enterprise. If this principle is violated, three important consequences will follow:
(a) If the manager is able to pass an obligation along with delegation of authority to the subordinates, the rule of single .chain of command will be violated.
(b) Management at the top shall have great responsibility and yet not be accountable for the results.
(c) When a manager is allowed to delegate even his obligation there will be no way of knowing who was accountable for what.
Thus, when authority is delegated, obligations are not passed down the organization; rather, new responsibilities are created at each level.
4. Parity of Authority and Responsibility:
Whenever authority is delegated, responsibility steps in and it coexists with the authority. A subordinate can be held accountable for the tasks assigned to him and the extent of authority delegated to him for their accomplishment. Accordingly, a sales manager cannot be held responsible for production failures for which he was given no authority. Hence, authority and responsibility should relate to the same assignment.
5. The Exception Principle:
Authority is delegated to push down the process of decision making as near the source of information and action as possible. The recipient of authority shall make proper use of it and make all the decisions falling within the scope of his authority. Only, in exceptional cases, when he cannot make the decision at his level should refer them upward for consideration and decision by the superior.
By delegating authority to a subordinate, a manager does not absolve himself of his responsibility. It is, therefore, essential that the manager should devise suitable techniques of control so as to ensure that the authority is properly used and results are achieved as expected.
Pooling together of the authority of two or more managers before a problem could be solved or a decision could be made is described as splintered authority.
6. Share Authority:
Where a superior comes and his subordinates come together for taking a decision, it is known as a shared authority.