You can only take responsibility if you also have ownership. Large organizations very quickly become like communist state, nobody own anything and any individual action is suspicious.

Absolutely!

This is a point that tends to kill introverted/insecure people I think. They assume that asking for permission is making things easier for people, but there's a limit where you're not allowing others to delegate responsibility onto you. Your job is for others to not have to think about the things you take care of.

huh, that's an interesting perspective. I've never thought of it that way. This framing could explain some of the bullshit I went through with a politicking manager and a less experienced leader.

Personally, I tend to assume accountability for things I lead, but as a manager, of course, I am also responsible and accountable for my team; including both things I signed off on and things I didn't (because I entrusted that independence to them.) It's an interesting line to walk.

The phrasing is not just a communication trick, it changes who owns the decision

Another reason is that you're making a choice for them.

We think we like more choices, but it's generally proven that having less makes it easier to decide.

One path is: "fuck sake, I need to review all of this and make an informed decision". The other is: "If I have time I'll check it otherwise who cares".

There's another benefit in the change of tone: you're preserving their authority, while at the same time making things easier.