Are you preoccupied with how your team completes their tasks? Are you hesitant to delegate, so you double-check everything? Do you always find yourself correcting their errors? If you answered yes to any of these questions, you are most likely a micromanager.
What is Micro Management? What Problems can it cause?
Micromanagers are frequently perfectionists who want their teams’ work and outcomes to be flawless. While there is nothing wrong with setting high expectations for your team, perfectionism may be a heavy load to bear and can lead to problems for you and your team. This is why one of the most critical talents you can develop is understanding when to be hands-off and when to give assistance and advice to your team.
Any leader who is continuously correcting their team’s work is a distraction rather than an assistant. Even their mere notion can cause people to peek over their shoulders, preventing them from genuinely concentrating. Micromanagers have a negative net influence despite their desire for their team to succeed.
Potential Alternatives To Micromanagement: We Ask The Experts
Isla Sibanda, the founder of Privacy Australia believes; “In many circumstances, particularly on medium-to small-impact initiatives, done is better than perfect. There is always an opportunity for constructive criticism, but is it about the quality and end of their work, or do you dislike how they accomplished things solely for stylistic or procedural reasons?
That’s a lot to comprehend for anyone, which is why you’ll need to evaluate how you’re providing feedback to your staff. Only by pausing and reflecting on previous events will you be able to determine if your management style is beneficial or detrimental to your team (or micromanaging).”
Jack Sobel, owner of a steel fabrication company and philanthropist who manages RMBH Charities states; “Instead of focusing on every element of your team’s work, consider the end result and how you might be a facilitator rather than a replacement.
Managers are responsible for the majority of the variation in employee engagement. Great managers help their staff attain their greatest potential, while terrible managers hold them back. Being micromanaged is one of the most prevalent complaints employees have about supervisors (and there are many).
A micromanager, rather than trusting an employee to execute a task, attempts to control every second of their employee’s day by continually providing “input” on how they may better.
Even though it’s a prevalent complaint, few managers acknowledge being micromanagers.”
Sam Underwood, founder of Bingo Card Creator shares the following:
“The rationale is straightforward: what employees perceive as micromanagement, micromanagers perceive as dedication, quality, or even simply being helpful. They may claim that someone must ensure that things are done correctly.
It’s not micromanagement to them; it’s just managing. Working under a micromanager might be aggravating, but imagine the inverse scenario: a manager who provides no guidance, assistance, or feedback. A hands-off boss can be just as difficult to work with, if not more so.
With a micromanager, you know that they will be there for you whenever you have an issue and that they are concerned about your job. It’s a terrific feeling to be trusted with a large project and given the flexibility to perform your finest job.
In the best-case scenario, we are up to the task. On the other hand, knowing that no one is watching over your shoulder might lead you to a cautious, error-avoiding approach. A micromanager may allow staff more flexibility to explore and be innovative in various aspects.
Micromanaging, from the standpoint of a manager, offers a sense of comfort and confidence that work is being completed. The desire for security is what drives individuals to micromanage in the first place. Micromanagement, at its worst, is having two individuals do the same task.
A manager’s time may be better spent leading rather than overseeing. However, it wastes time for an employee since, rather than focusing on their task, they are continually obliged to explain and re-explain themselves and their work. This reduces productivity and reduces a company’s profit margins.”
Micromanagement is not just inefficient; it is also unpleasant, aggravating, and detrimental to employee engagement. It is hard for an employee to fully flourish and develop without trust and a sense of ownership over their work. While some micromanagement is appropriate or essential throughout an employee’s onboarding process, excessive micromanagement is a one-way ticket to irritation and unhappiness. At the end of the day, a micromanager is someone who struggles to trust their staff. Their fear of losing control not only jeopardizes the company’s success, but it’s also unhealthy.
Being concerned about every move an employee makes is not only unpleasant but is also unsustainable. A far better way is to invest in workers’ learning and development to ensure they are competent and suited for whatever jobs they are assigned, no matter how difficult.
Why do so many managers engage in micromanagement if it is so destructive?
There are several potential drivers according to Sam Willis, founder of Raincatcher.
“People get promoted because they are good at what they do. It’s natural to continue doing what you’re excellent at and what you’ve been rewarded for. Except that it is no longer your job, so you must learn to let go and concentrate on the obligations of your new position. That is difficult. Another factor to consider is cognitive style. Some individuals are meticulous. They are more at ease dealing with specifics and less at ease managing people or thinking about the larger picture.
They may have been elevated to a leadership position that is not a good fit for them, and they would be better suited as high-performing single contributors. Arrogance is a third motivator. Some people are convinced that no one else can be as brilliant, talented, or diligent as they are—and nothing can convince them otherwise. These people will never be good managers until they learn to be humble.
Micromanagement is always ineffective. You’ll never catch me micromanaging. Instead, I’ll do my work—and, if they allow me, some of my boss’s work as well. I’ll be there to help you perform your work—and even some of mine if you like. If you are unable or unwilling to fulfill your job, we will have to confront the issue directly. There is no scenario in which I accomplish both my job and your job and you keep your job.”
