Micromanagers feel compelled to do it all rather than lead and guide others, the administrative equivalent of a one-man gang, making them the direct opposite of smart leaders and managers. Indeed, micromanaging can be an obligation based on deep-seated insecurities resistant to change. But any knowledge acquired by micromanagers that leads to self-awareness and change, no matter how slight, will be welcomed by a large portion of the workforce that is micromanaged.
A micromanager is one who feels compelled to tell you how to do your job. However, this is not the whole story. Although they want to tell you how to do their job, most micromanagers don’t really know as to do your job. But once they see your work, they can tell you of course to do your job. They prefer to do their job rather than clearly setting your expectations and allowing you a certain degree of flexibility around these expectations. Indeed, a fundamental characteristic of micromanaging is setting unrealistic and rigid expectations, often completely idiosyncratic and not tied to objective quality standards. I’ve seen micromanaged employees whose production, while perfectly acceptable by most standards, fell short of unstated expectations and was completely rewritten by a micromanager in a much denser style than the original.
Micromanaging is so toxic because it breeds mistrust and undermines motivation. It will literally paralyze an organization because the micromanager will be so busy approving, editing, reviewing, and doing their employees’ work that operations in the organization will come to a trickle. Additional consequences of micromanaging are:
- turnover increases because few people can tolerate constant micromanagement;
- employees do sloppy work because they feel that no matter what they do, they will be corrected;
- quality declines because most micromanagers have deluded themselves into believing that only they can get the job done right, when in fact many micromanagers border on incompetence.
Smart managers know that employee engagement is a necessary part of good supervision. But engagement is not micromanaging. Engagement means knowing your employees’ responsibilities and tasks, even to the point of being able to teach them the basics of their jobs. In fact, smart managers could do their employees’ work, but they can’t. Smart managers are confident enough to trust their employees to do their jobs. even though the tasks are not performed exactly as they would.
If you want to be a smart manager and what you’ve read so far gives you the unsettling feeling that you may have micromanaging tendencies, take this quiz. If two or three describe you, then you have work to do. Consciousness is the first step of change.
- Do you tell employees how to do tasks instead of what you want done?
- Do you think that to do a task well you have to do it yourself?
- When employees don’t produce what you want, do you prefer to do it yourself than instruct them in what you want?
- Do you expect others to “know” you well enough to anticipate what should be done without you having to tell them?
- Do you find that you spend more and more time reviewing the work of your employees?
- Are your organization’s projects, however insignificant, always delayed because others are waiting for you to approve them?
- Are you having a hard time retaining employees?
- Do your employees think you are a micromanager?
Many micromanagers are too insecure to deal with their shortcomings. The most likely cure is dismissal after the organization collapses so badly that it is in danger of survival. But for the few micromanagers who have an idea of their behavior and who want to become expert managers, what can be done?
The change will be difficult, but here are some things to practice:
- In each job, have a clear image of what you want to produce; tell your employees and then refrain from telling them how to do it. If they don’t produce what you want, assume it was your fault for not clearly stating what you want; reaffirm their expectations and ask them to try again; do not take away their work and do it yourself.
- If you continue to find fault with your work, look at your expectations. How reasonable are they? Ask your colleagues for their opinion on the work of your employees. Peer feedback can help you restore your expectations to a more reasonable level.
- If the job still doesn’t look good, and if substantial damage won’t occur, let it out, but make sure the employee receives feedback from the customer about the job. Let your employees fail. Give them permission to learn and improve from their failure, but younder no circumstances punish employees for failing. That is a sure sign of an abusive and incompetent manager. And the employee will lose confidence in you for having “set” them up to fail.
- Delegate approval authority for all but the most important organizational results to others. Start at the level immediately below you, and as subordinates gain more confidence and understanding of your vision, ask them to delegate further down the chain.
Micromanaging kills organizations. Smart managers foster an open and trusting environment that enables employees to be successful and thrive. The Golden Rule of Smart Management (When Employees Succeed, Managers Succeed) is a basic leadership principle. Shifting from micromanaging to smart management means embracing this rule in word and practice. The organization will be more effective, employees will be more productive, and you will be more successful as a manager.