“I wish I had that delegation model 50 years ago when I founded this company–things might have gone a lot better!”
-End of day quote from a recent Leadership Team Launch participant
The delegation model in question was Jurgen Appelo’s 7 Levels of Delegation. The response is common when we apply it to real decisions a leadership team is working through.
Another participant in that session had been using David Marquet’s Ladder of Leadership with his organization. Both have seven levels, and they’d struggled to apply the Ladder of Leadership everywhere. But they had seen some bright spots where people were using “I intend to…” language. He asked our advice on whether to stop using ladders and start using levels.
Our answer: maybe, but it might be better to layer them.
The Ladder of Leadership and the 7 Levels of Delegation overlap, but they do different jobs: one is developmental, and the other creates decision clarity.
The Ladder of Leadership is primarily developmental. It describes how someone relates to a problem or action: Do they wait to be told what to do? Offer an observation? Make a recommendation? State an intention? Act and report afterward? A leader uses the ladder to help someone exercise increasing judgment, initiative, and leadership.
The 7 Levels of Delegation creates decision ownership and process clarity. For a particular kind of decision, who has the final call? What kinds of conversations happen when? Is the other person (or people) providing input, sharing a consensus decision, or actually making the decision? The Ladder of Leadership asks, “How much leadership is this person exercising?” The Seven Levels of Delegation answers, “Who owns this decision, and how will they interact with others in the process of deciding?”
A Level-by-Level Walkthrough
A walkthrough of the levels shows there’s no exact translation: some levels align closely; others have no direct equivalent.
| Appelo level | Decision contract | Closest Marquet rung | How they compare |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Tell | The leader decides and communicates the decision. | 1. “Tell me what to do.” | Strong match. The person waits for direction, and authority remains with the leader. |
| 2. Sell | The leader decides, then explains the reasoning and builds alignment. | No direct equivalent | The authority resembles Marquet 1, but Marquet’s ladder does not distinguish between giving direction and persuading someone to support it. |
| 3. Consult | The leader seeks input, then makes the final decision. | 2–4. “I see…,” “I think/recommend…,” and “I would like to…” | These Marquet rungs represent increasingly thoughtful input and initiative, but the leader still decides or approves. |
| 4. Agree | The leader and others make the decision together. | No direct equivalent | Appelo specifies a shared or consensus decision rule. Marquet measures individual leadership behavior, not collective governance. |
| 5. Advise | The other person decides after seeking and considering advice. | 5. “I intend to…” | This is the closest overlap, but an important difference remains: Marquet gives the leader a stop-right; Appelo gives the other person the final call within the agreed guardrails. |
| 6. Inquire | The other person decides; the leader asks about the reasoning afterward. | 6. “I’ve done…” | Strong match. The decision and action happen before the conversation. In Appelo, inquiry is for understanding and learning, not reopening the decision. |
| 7. Delegate | The other person owns the decision without required prior advice or subsequent justification. | 7. “I’ve been doing…” | Strong match. Communication focuses on broader outcomes rather than reviewing individual decisions. |
The Pattern Underneath the Levels
In the 7 Levels:
- At Levels 1–3, the leader decides.
- At Level 4, the group decides together.
- At Levels 5–7, the other person or team decides.
In the Ladder of Leadership:
- At Levels 1–4, the person contributes increasing amounts of observation, judgment, and initiative, while leadership still holds the decision or approval.
- At Level 5, ownership shifts toward the person, but leadership retains a veto before the decision moves forward.
- At Levels 6–7, the person acts before leadership is informed.
Why “I Intend To” Is Not Quite the Same as 5–Advise
Marquet’s “I intend to…” means:
“I have thought this through, and I am going to act unless you stop me.”
This reverses the default from waiting for approval to proceeding unless vetoed. It creates substantially more initiative and ownership than asking permission, while preserving a way for the leader to intervene before the action.
Appelo’s Level 5–Advise makes a stronger transfer of decision authority:
“This is your decision. Seek and seriously consider advice, including mine, but the final call is yours.”
The leader influences the decision, but does not retain an ordinary veto within the agreed scope and constraints. Our favorite way to pick the correct level in the 7 Levels is by asking:
If the leader disagrees, may the person still proceed within the agreed guardrails?
- If yes, the decision can be at Level 5–Advise, Level 6–Inquire, or Level 7–Delegate.
- If no—if the leader can stop it simply because they prefer another choice—the authority is closer to Level 3, even if the person used “I intend to.”
- If the leader intervenes only because an agreed constraint, legal requirement, safety boundary, or decision scope was violated, that is enforcement of the delegation boundary rather than a veto.
Using the Models Together
The two models are complementary. Use Marquet to develop how people think, communicate, and take ownership. Use Appelo to clarify who owns specific decisions, within what constraints, and what consultation or reporting is expected.
Someone can demonstrate high leadership on Marquet’s ladder even when a particular decision remains with leadership. For example, they might independently gather evidence, evaluate options, and make a strong recommendation to someone who owns the decision at an Appelo Level 3.
Likewise, someone can own a decision at Appelo Level 5 while using Marquet’s “I intend to…” language to communicate their reasoning and keep others aligned—as long as “I intend to” is not functioning as a disguised request for approval.
Marquet helps people take more leadership. Appelo clarifies where decision authority lives.
Want more clarity and ownership on your leadership team?
We help leadership teams build strong leadership behaviors and clearer decision ownership so people can act with confidence.
We’d love to hear about your leadership team. Contact us.
Last updated