MANAGING PEOPLE
When Do We Micromanage People?
There Is An Appropriate Time and Place for it
“…once you’re done, cc me in the email.”
Granted, there are times where we need to be cc’d in an email, especially when it is something that has our jobs at stake. More often than not, that is not the case; if you are asking to be cc’d in every single email, you have the hallmark trait of a micromanager.
For most employees, being micromanaged can be frustrating and demoralizing. It means that the leader does not trust the team to do something on their own. There is also annoyingly close attention paid to details — oftentimes, they are heavily edited. Typically, micromanagers associate themselves with the corrections very closely. It is their pride and joy: after all, if not for their ‘eye for detail’, the mistake would have gone unnoticed. That would have been disastrous.
Most leaders would chalk all that up to management — after all, it is part of a manager’s responsibilities to ensure work is delivered on time. It is also the manager’s job to ensure quality in the deliverables. The problem comes when micromanagers apply that same level of intensity and scrutiny on every single task. Usually, they are unwarranted.
Yet, micromanagement still has its time and place. The problem is that most leaders fail to understand where they can start micromanaging, and why they should do so in the first place.
These leaders are responsible for at least 79% of employees experiencing micromanagement, with 69% of them considering to change jobs because of it. Leaders who exercise micromanagement without a clear understanding of why they are doing so will contribute to that statistic, but while they’re down in the weeds with the team, most micromanagers are unconscious — or unwilling to admit — about themselves being one.
Why do people micromanage?
Often, it is an unconscious behavioral pattern and it is similar across different industries. Typically, it is the convergence between an operational and informational focus — both being at an unhealthy level.
- Micromanagers want information. While this typically happens to managers who rise through the ranks, it can happen to anyone who feels that they are being disconnected from the ground. For instance, they might have less direct contact with the customers. Hence, to reduce this anxiety, they seek information in many ways: reports, meetings, one-on-one conversations. However, most micromanagers go about their data collection unplanned. Oftentimes, they end up looking at basic data, which serve no purpose without understanding why they need it in the first place.
- Micromanagers want to operate. “This was how we did it in the past.” Typically, micromanagers hold on to the old ways of doing their job or their old job. They wear their old behavioral patterns like a badge. While operational managers are great, these leaders are promoted as they are expected to handle high-level tasks: strategy, budgets, problem-solving, people management and the like. Such micromanagers will often end up being involved in the day-to-day operations a lot — they cannot trust their team. To reduce that anxiety, they get their hands dirty.
To help someone understand how he or she is micromanaging the team, it requires more than just the direct reports to give feedback. Third parties, senior leaders and entry-level interns are all possible people to receive feedback from.
Most of the reasons why people want to micromanage are, in fact, deeply well-intentioned. Taking a step back, one can realize that the need for informational and operational focus are inherently good for the company. Micromanagement has its stages:
- During crises. Especially when the team has never faced this situation before, the micromanager is great to step in. Typically, when jobs are on the line and livelihoods are at stake, it is much better to trust someone who can steer the ship on his or her own, rather than trust a ragtag team of people who can barely row an oar in the storm.
- For products requiring high-precision. Paying attention to details is great but the scrutiny on details by a micromanager is on an even higher level. For products that require extreme attention to details (e.g. it is meant to save a life, or prevent a life for being lost), it is important to have someone being “overly-attentive”.
- Handling tight budgets. Expenditure is often a headache as companies attempt to balance their sheets. When budgets are tight, even a dollar can count as overspending — a micromanager would ensure that that does not happen. He or she can scrutinize every part of the project that is spending money, before deciding whether or not it should be a dollar or ninety cents.
In its most literal sense, micromanagement is simply “controlling every part of a situation, even small details”, according to the Cambridge Dictionary. However, without a clear direction and aligning the employees’ needs with the leaders, micromanagement will, therefore, become excessive. That makes it negative — research has shown that it can be very costly.
Besides causing unwanted stress and lowering employee morale, micromanagement can affect the balance sheets too. Employees can become less productive and over time, this becomes a form of employee disengagement. When it continues unfettered, leaders risk the employees’ mental health.
Rather than continue using such a risky management style all time, micromanagers need to identify their patterns and start working from there.
1. Find the ‘why’
Like everything we do, we often rationalize the things we do — micromanagers are the same. However, once they dig deep into why they are micromanaging other people, it can be possible to address those patterns. For instance:
- “I’d rather do it myself” means “My team probably can’t get it right anyway, so I should save my time”
- “Whenever I’m not involved, there’s some kind of mess up” means “The last time I trusted my team, they made mistakes. I’m not going to let that happen again.”
- “I don’t think they will understand what I want” means “I don’t trust my team to do their jobs according to my expectations and standards”
Dig deep into the rationalization: what does it mean? Is it a lack of trust or is it an overly-high expectation? Once the micromanager understands why it can be easy to reverse it and find the reasons why one should micromanage. For instance:
- “I should trust my team to do it as they will improve over time. What I should provide is coaching, direction and guidance, rather than a hands-on approach. My team can become the best supporters if I give them the best resources.”
- “Mistakes happen. No one is perfect. What I should do is re-align the team and ensure everyone understands what at stake.”
- “I should tell my team the standards I have and see what they think — perhaps there is more to uncover.”
2. Remove the ‘micro’
The focus on ‘micro’ is the problem with micromanaging. While every part of a task goes hand in hand with one another, managers are meant to look at the big picture. Hence, micromanagers should offload the low hanging fruit and minutia to employees that meant to handle them.
Managers can also engage in explicit discussion with senior leaders. Rather than involve themselves directly with everything, it is much wiser to understand what they should be involved in by checking with them. The main point is to spend time and energy on things where real value can be added.
3. Dictate Expectations, not Instructions
Instructions are great for a tutorial but like all tutorials, it only happens once or twice at the beginning. Leaders who dictate instructions are leaders who stifle innovation. Hence, leaders should:
- Set expectations at the start. What is considered good? What is considered unsatisfactory? What are the conditions to be met for completion?
- Share what has been done before. However, this is not an excuse to dictate instructions: it is about direction and guidance. By discussing past experiences, employees can better understand how they can innovate and experiment. Sometimes, that leads to even better results.
- Open the floor for discussion. Nothing is set in stone. There is always room to innovate and discover what else can be done to make it more efficient.
4. Focus on Success & Accept Failures
It is human to have a fear of failure. When the stakes are high, it is understandable to have reservations about experimentation and things veering from the norm. The reality is, some projects can determine a leader’s tenure in the company and thus micromanaging can occur.
Failures are also the norm in life. When micromanagers constantly go deep into every task, the team eventually believes that the only way they can ‘perform’ — subjective to the micromanager — is to have their leader constantly manage everything they do.
Instead, leaders must set the team for success and inject a healthy amount of optimism. Set big, scary goals but provide guidance and support needed to reach there. Over time, these accrued losses are much more effective in ensuring that the team makes less mistakes in the future.
Rather than have the team adapt to the micromanager by managing up, leaders should be creating the optimum environment for the team to function. After all, one leader cannot do everything, regardless of how micromanagers think. There needs to be reliance and trust on the team. In an era of employees pursuing self-actualization, purpose, and engagement, micromanaging becomes a surefire way to have capable, talented individuals head for a desk at a rival competitor’s office.
