Empowerment in Action
Seated outside an office, a businessman couldn´t help but overhear two clerical assistants as he waited to meet with their manager. The assistants would periodically call a customer, ask how the person liked the company´s product, and jot down the person´s response. The businessman was impressed. "No wonder this manager has such a fine reputation," he thought.

When the man met with the manager, he complimented her on the assignment she had delegated to her assistants. "What do you mean?" asked the woman. The man explained what the assistants were doing. "Oh, is that what they´re up to?" asked the woman, smiling.

The businessman was puzzled. "You mean you don´t even know what your own assistants are doing?" he asked in disbelief. "No," said the woman. "My job is not to tell them what to do. My job is to get everyone to think creatively in pursuit of the same goal." The woman went on to explain that she talks to her staff regularly about company goals and standards as well as budgets, policies, and ethics. She provides the framework, she explained, but lets the staff figure out how to meet the goals. The woman then leaned forward and smiled. "Here´s my secret," she said. "I don´t know what my people are doing, but because I work face to face with them, I know that whatever it is they´re doing is exactly what I´d want them to be doing if I knew what they were doing!"

How´s that for trust? Certainly not every leader can "let go" so easily, but letting go and trusting others are the basic tenets of true empowerment.

When Employees Fail
Employees who perform poorly usually have only themselves to blame. At least that´s the conventional wisdom. New research, however, challenges that assumption and suggests that managers are sometimes the ones responsible for an employee´s weak performance. In the "set-up-to-fail syndrome," employees whose managers perceive them as mediocre or poor performers ultimately fulfill those low expectations.

Typically, the syndrome begins when an employee loses favor with the boss. Perhaps the employee loses a client or misses a deadline, or maybe the boss and the employee simply do not get along from the start. Whatever the cause, the syndrome is set in motion when the boss starts worrying that the employee´s performance is not up to par. The manager tries to boost the employee´s performance by supervising more closely. For example, the manager may require the employee to seek approval before making decisions or request paperwork justifying actions. The employee views the increased supervision as a lack of confidence and begins to doubt his or her own abilities. Many employees lose motivation and begin performing poorly. In turn, the boss sees the employee´s withdrawal as proof that the person is a low achiever and puts even more pressure on him or her.

Breaking this cycle is very difficult, concede the researchers. They believe that preventing the syndrome is far easier than interrupting it. Studies find that managers who do not get trapped in the syndrome have one thing in common: frequent, open communication with subordinates. The two discuss job priorities, performance measures, time allocation, and expectations. The manager then gradually reduces involvement as the employee´s performance increases, but open communication remains a top priority.