Delegation Poker: Making Delegation a Team Sport

Delegation isn't a binary choice. Delegation Poker is a game where teams discuss and agree on their level of authority for key decisions, moving from 'manager decides' to 'team decides'. It's used to clarify roles and empower teams.
THE MENTAL MODEL: Delegation is not an on/off switch. It's a spectrum with many shades of gray between a manager making every decision and a team having complete autonomy. Delegation Poker is a structured game that helps a manager and their team collaboratively decide where specific responsibilities should fall on that spectrum.
HOW IT WORKS: A manager or facilitator presents a key decision area, like 'approving vacation requests' or 'choosing the next sprint's technology'. Each team member, including the manager, privately chooses a card representing a level of delegation (from 'manager tells' to 'team decides and informs manager'). Everyone reveals their card simultaneously. Differences in opinion are the most valuable part, as they spark a discussion to understand different perspectives and agree on a clear level of authority for that specific task. The goal is not to 'win' but to reach a shared understanding.
WHEN TO USE IT: Use Delegation Poker when forming a new team to establish clear roles from the start. It's also effective when an existing team feels blocked by unclear decision-making processes or when a manager wants to empower their team but needs a safe, structured way to do so. It makes implicit assumptions about authority explicit.
WHEN NOT TO USE IT: Avoid using it if management is not genuinely open to delegating responsibility; it will feel like a pointless exercise and erode trust. It is also overkill for minor, day-to-day operational tasks. The process is most valuable for significant, recurring decisions where ambiguity causes friction or slows down the team.
ONE CANONICAL EXAMPLE: A software team is unsure who can decide to ship a hotfix. The team leader, product owner, and engineers play Delegation Poker. The engineers may vote for full autonomy, while the PO wants to be consulted. The discussion reveals the PO's concern is about communicating with stakeholders. They agree that the team can deploy hotfixes autonomously but must inform the PO immediately afterward. This simple agreement, born from a 10-minute discussion, prevents future delays and confusion.
Read the original → management30.com
Get five bites like this every day.
Tezvyn delivers a daily feed of 60-second tech bites with quizzes to lock in what you learn.