Line and Staff Relationship / What is delegation of authority
(a) Line and Staff Relationship
Line organisation believes in too much centralisation of authority and control, whereas, functional (or staff) organisation believes in too much decentralisation of authority and flexibility. As a result, line organisation is autocratic and functional organisation has a slack control. Line organisation insists too much on unity of command; while functional organisation emphasizes too much on the decentralisation of control. Both line and functional organisations suffer from some limitations. In order to strike a balance between the two, a new type of organisation has been developed i.e. line and staff organisation.
In line and staff organisation, the structure is basically that of the line organisation, but staff officers (i.e. functional experts) are provided to advise the line authorities in the performance of their duties. Staff (or functional) officers render advisory aid to the line officers (i.e. departmental heads) but they have no power to enforce it. The power of enforcement remains with the line officers. Therefore, staff (functional) positions do not possess any authority as these positions are purely advisory in nature. Staff officers have power to recommend but not to enforce. On the contrary, a line officer is vested with executive authority. Line officers are responsible for the accomplishment of various objectives. Therefore, staff officers are ‘thinkers’ while line officers are ‘doers’.
Line and staff organisation is marked by the following characteristics :
1. Two types of relationships: In a line and staff organisation, there are two types of relationships (i.e. line and staff). Staff officers are ‘thinkers’ whereas line officers are ‘doers’.
2. Separation of planning and execution: This structure distinguishes two aspects of administration, namely, planning and execution. Planning is done by staff officers, whereas plans are executed by line officers. A staff officer is a specialist, whereas a line officer is a generalist.
3. Extent of authority: The degree and extent of authority is much higher in the case of line officers than that of staff officers. Staff officers have the power to recommend and line officers have the power to enforce.
4. Extent of responsibility: Line officers are responsible for achieving organisational objectives. On the other hand, staff officers are responsible for assisting line officers with regard to supportive activities (i.e., advice, help, guidance, etc.).
5. Independent work: Staff officers and line officers work independently. Line officers and staff officers are not in a relationship of superior and subordinate. Staff specialists are appointed beyond the line of authority.
6. Supplementary activities: Line officers enjoy more power and authority that flow vertically. On the other hand, staff officers at each level are to make necessary recommendations. Thus, line officers are to command and staff officers are to advise. They are rendering supplementary activities.
Limitations of Line and Staff Organisation
Line and staff organisation suffers from the following limitations
1. Lack of Co-ordination: There is lack of clear allocation of responsibility between line and staff officers. Moreover, overlapping activities lead to confusion and disorder. The line officer may reject the advice of the staff officer without assigning any reason for his action.
2. Conflict between line and staff personnel : The line officer may misunderstand the advice given by staff officers. Sometimes, line officers claim that staff specialists do not always provide correct advice. On the other hand, staff officers may feel ignored when line officers reject their advice without assigning any reason.
3. Lack of responsibility of staff officers: The staff officers cannot be held responsible if unfavourable results are obtained. As a result, they may not perform their duties well. Staff officers may be casual in their approach as the whole blame for not-performance lies with line officers.
4. Loss of creativity of line officers: The line officers rely heavily on the staff specialists for their advice. This dampens the creativity and initiative of the line officers. Often line officers refer everything to staff officers for their advice.
5. Expensive system: The need to employ two separate sets of personnel may prove to be expensive in terms of overhead charges. As a result, small and medium size organisations cannot afford such a system.
6. Complex organisational structure: The overall organisational structure becomes complicated and complex due to the introduction of staff relationships in the line structure. It suffers from the drawback of poor co-ordination because of dual relationship in the organisation.
(b) Delegation of Authority
Delegation of authority takes place when a manager assigns a part of his work to others and gives them the authority to perform the assigned tasks. The manager who delegates authority holds his subordinates responsible for proper performance of the assigned tasks. Thus, the process of delegation involves assigning duties, entrusting authority and imposing responsibility on subordinates. Some popular definitions of delegation are given below:
(i) According to Theo Haimann Delegation of authority merely means granting of authority to subordinates to operate within prescribed limits.
(ii) According to Koontz and O’Donnell Authority is delegated when enterprise discretion is vested in a subordinate by a superior. The entire process of delegation involves the determination of results expected, assignment of tasks, transfer of authority for accomplishment of these tasks, and exaction of responsibility for their accomplishment.
Problems of Delegation
Delegation appears to be a simple process, but in practice, many difficulties come in the way of effective delegation. These difficulties may be grouped into three categories which are discussed below: failure in delegation
1. On the Part of the Superior: Managerial may result because of the following limitations :
(i) Resistance: A manger may think that he can do the job better himself and so he will be reluctant to delegate authority. “I can do it better myself fallacy obstructs delegation of authority. Such executives often oppose the idea of sharing authority with the others.”
(ii) Lack of ability to plan and direct: Lack of ability of the manager to correctly plan and issue suitable instructions in guiding the subordinates, though he is willing to delegate, creates hurdles in the way of effective delegation.
(iii) Lack of willingness to let go : The desire of dominance over the work of subordinates at each step hampers the delegation. Moreover, a manager may be afraid that if he lets the subordinate make decisions, he may outshine him.
(iv) Lack of willingness to trust subordinates: Delegation implies a trustful attitude between the superior and the subordinate. Lack of confidence in the capacity, ability and dependability of the subordinate obstructs the superior to delegate authority. Since a manager lacks confidence in the subordinate, he will not delegate authority to give him any chance to make mistakes and learn how to take correct decisions.
(v) Lack of controls: While delegating authority, the superior must find means of assuring himself that the authority is being used to accomplish the given assignments. Where the manager does not set up adequate controls or has no means of knowing the use of authority, he may hesitate to delegate the authority.
2. On the Part of the Subordinates: The subordinates may avoid shouldering responsibilities even though there is no fault of the part of the superior. They may be reluctant to accept authority because of the following reasons:
(i) Subordinates may lack self-confidence because incompetence or fear of failure.
(ii) Subordinates may have the fear criticism or may have been victims of undue criticism for committing mistakes in the past.
(ii) Some people prefer to depend upon the boss for decision making.
(iv) Subordinates may be unwilling to accept delegation where required information and facilities are not available or when effective communication is lacking.
(v) There may not be sufficient incentives for accepting additional responsibility.
(vi) Subordinates will not accept delegation when they are already worked or when they feel that delegation will merely increase burden on them.
3. On the Part of the Organisation: The faults contributing to the weakness of delegation in practice may also lie with the organistion. They may include the following:
(i) Defective organisation structure and non-clarity of authority responsibility relationships.
(ii) Inadequate planning.
(iii) Splintered authority.
(iv) Infringement of the principle of unity of command.
(v) Lack of effective control.
