A reader recently wrote in an asked, “Based on your experience, what advice do you have for working across a team of overachievers who can’t delegate?”
Overachievers—in Washington, D.C.? Unheard of. Almost as rare as a meeting that could have been an email.
International affairs professionals in many nations’ capitols are highly educated and ambitious. They’re usually ambitious to either “make a difference” or “make a name for themselves.” Unlike their private-sector counterparts, government professionals—even entry-level analysts—often find themselves as the sole point of contact for an international or bilateral issue.
That was my experience. Even as an intern, I was told never to introduce myself as “just the intern,” because I was the primary point of contact for an issue.
In this scenario, the reader’s question about delegation isn’t your typical downward delegation challenge between a manager and an underling. This question is most likely about peers wanting to avoid sharing information because information is power.
Why delegation in policymaking is hard
The thing is, when you get to be the single person responsible for an issue, to include attending all the relevant meetings as your office’s representative, writing the policy issue papers and briefing leaders, you feel important. And feeling important feels good.
Your ambition kicks in and you want to protect your ability to chart your legacy. When you care deeply—about the issue and your reputation—it’s easy to believe no one else will meet your standard. Doing the work yourself feels faster and safer. Until, of course, you hit burnout.
What is delegation?
Normally delegation refers to working through others instead of doing things yourself. In the policy world, getting things done often means having a representative for your office at every relevant meeting to voice your position and report back to your office.
Delegating among peers usually entails sharing information and allowing others to provide feedback based on their portfolio. Sometimes you decide that a new issue overlaps better with a colleague’s area of expertise and they should be the point of contact. When hot issues emerge, turf battles inevitably follow: “I’ve cultivated this relationship for a year—shouldn’t you at least tap my expertise before charging ahead?”
It will take intentional effort to create an environment where you can communicate to a peer in the policy world about the possibility of their burnout, and the benefits of delegating to maintain the overall mission or the office’s reputation in interagency meetings.
Recommendation
First, based on the intentional effort that is required, make sure you’re focused on a colleague who is a full timer, not a fellow or some other temporary appointee. A person planning to stay only a few years may think temporary burnout is worth the longer-term career projection. In this case, you probably can’t convince them to delegate. On the other hand, someone who is making international affairs at your agency a career will be more open to finding sustainable workflows.
Second, most people don’t delegate because they don’t trust others to deliver. And here’s the hard part: it’s not just because they’re control freaks. It’s because they don’t think you’ll do the job as well as they can.
How can you make them trust you?
You need to identify if they want to make a difference or make a name for themselves because these motivations are different.
In the former, they need to trust the quality of your work and that you are committed to the same ambitious goal. Start small: ask for their input on one of your issues or delegate something to them first. Show them your work, your reliability, and your shared commitment to quality. What can you lead in your own lane that is aligned, even at a distance?
In the case of a peer motivated by personal legacy, they need to believe that you can and will help them further their reputation. Can you quietly identify a ball they’re dropping and provide an unsolicited solution? If you see a benefit in letting them think you’re a sidekick rather than a peer try, “I am super passionate about this issue and I’d love to learn from you.” Additionally, what information do they need that they don’t have but you can get?
Be honest—you’re an overachiever, too. There’s a good chance someone tried to delegate to you, and you weren’t interested in the task. Ask yourself, “what do I want them to delegate to me?” Is that something you honestly think they’ll share? Maybe they’re happy to delegate a task but you want them to delegate problem solving. If that’s the case, identify ways you can incrementally increase trust. Start with what they’re willing to delegate and then volunteer to help with more, saying you’ll stay within a safe boundary away from the heart of the issue.
Shutdown
International affairs professionals in the government sector face struggles with lateral delegation, where peers working on different aspects of a bilateral relationship or international issue decide to not share information. It’s not personal, but it’s intentional. We all know that government work is about coordinated stances. So when you withhold information, you usually feel like you’ve got a good reason.
The fundamental issue is trust. You need your non-delegating peer to view you as a trusted ally. That requires intentional effort. You need to learn their perspective and they’ll only be willing to share it if they see some benefit.
Remember, do some self-reflection. They may want to delegate but it’s just not what you want them to share.
Finally, choose generosity. Sharing information actually makes you more powerful because people will begin to see you as a resource that saves them time. This approach also establishes you as a resource when the next wave of temporary workers comes in and is looking to hit the ground running. They’ll run right to you first.
