Control issues. It looks lazy. I'm used to doing all the work myself. If I'm not careful, I'll become irrelevant.

I've heard (and felt) all of the above excuses for not delegating. But it's an important skill to master, no matter how uncomfortable it may make you feel. When done well, it tells people they're a trusted resource and an important part of the success of the company. As for you, it opens up more time for you to solve new problems.

In short, it helps everyone up their game. So, in the spirit of upping our delegation game, let's examine some of the ways to determine whether you should -- or should not -- delegate. Plus, we'll look at some ways to delegate successfully when the time comes.

Should You Delegate That? Ask Yourself These Questions First

1) Is someone else on the team more qualified to do this?

If a project will take you 10 hours to complete and it'll take someone else 10 minutes, the clear answer is "delegate." (And, perhaps, ask them to teach you their shortcuts so you can fend for yourself if necessary.)

Sometimes it's not as cut and dry as that, though. In those cases, I refer to the "moving analogy:"

I'm a frugal person. Last time I moved, I was on the fence whether I should hire movers -- I had never done it before, always moving my stuff myself. But I went for it, hiring a team of three movers. It cost me a few hundred bucks, and they were done in two hours. Compare that to my experience moving myself: The truck rental alone cost a few hundred bucks, it took me all day, I was sweaty and unhappy at the end, and I owed my friends a lot of beer and pizza at the end of it all.

Bottom line: The movers are better at moving than I am. That's why they're in the moving business. And that's why you hire people that are better at other things than you are ... because we all can't be good at everything. 

2) Does this give someone else the chance to do something noteworthy?

Be a leader? Get visibility in front of important people? Grow their career? Expand their skill set? These are good things that keep people around, engaged, and happy. Consider delegating the work if it meets the other "delegation-worthy" criteria.

3) Is there a time restriction to consider?

If something comes up that needs to get done stat, it's not only wise -- but crucial -- that it gets delegated to the one most qualified to do it correctly and on time. And if that person happens to be you, it's best not to delegate it, despite the opportunities for learning and growth that might come with it. In fact, trying to squeeze a learning opportunity into a time-crunched situation can seriously backfire. Without the proper time to train or answer questions, the person to whom you delegate can end up feeling rushed and deliver a sub-par end-product.

If you ever find yourself in a situation where only one person cam solve a problem, though, you might need to set up some cross-training. There should never be just one person who can execute an important task; be sure there's at least one other person who can play backup for someone with specialized skills. 

4) Is this work likely to come up again?

If something is likely to become a recurring responsibility, it makes sense to appoint someone as the DRI (directly responsible individual) for that task. That person could be you -- but it doesn't have to be.

With new tasks come the perfect opportunity to teach and learn. This could be a good career opportunity that someone else might relish. Don't hoard all those good opportunities for yourself! 

5) Are there enough support systems to make delegation successful?

Delegation doesn't mean saying, "here, do this" and disappearing. It requires that you provide a clear request and context for the request, at the very least. But it may also require additional resources -- time spent training, documentation to follow, availability for questions, a collaborator or resource to turn to, etc.