Criticisms of Delegation and Decentralization in Abdicating Authority and Upholding Ubuntu Philosophy in Social Welfare Organisations

Abstract

This study seeks to further explore ongoing criticisms of how authority is distributed and decentralized within Social Welfare Organizations in Zimbabwe, particularly examining these processes through the lens of Ubuntu philosophy. Concerns center on how upper management delegates power, raising debates about both the possible abdication of responsibility and whether distribution practices align with Ubuntu’s core values. One main issue is that delegation of tasks often occurs without adequate attention to respecting staff members’ dignity or acknowledging their inherent worth, which undermines effective task execution and equitable work distribution in community-focused organizations. In Zimbabwe’s government-affiliated agencies, participatory elements of democracy are frequently neglected during task delegation, leadership tends to emphasize their own involvement in policy, coordination, and monitoring, rather than sharing these vital functions. However, lower-tier managers are sometimes afforded the autonomy and resources necessary for creative problem-solving in their job roles. The research was conducted using a combination of desktop reviews and case studies, integrating both qualitative and quantitative methods such as observation, group discussions, and interviews. Participants were drawn from a diverse range of international and national organizations operating in Zimbabwe, including both statutory and non-statutory entities. Results suggest that many criticisms of delegation and decentralization stem from entrenched bureaucratic processes and structural inequalities. Participants observed that these decentralized approaches could impede the promotion of organizational ethics and values, with some leaders failing to uphold respect and empathy, especially when sharing authority and decision-making roles.