How Micromanaging Leads to Failure and Bad Leadership

One of the greatest American Presidents – Theodore Roosevelt once said – the best executive is the one who has sense enough to pick good men to do what he wants to be done, and self-restraint from keeping meddling them while they do it. – This is the essence and backbone of delegation. The golden rule of leadership is that when employees succeed, leaders succeed as well. Employees in Dream Builders have been doing great, and the management is doing great as well. Great leaders foster an open and engaging environment that allows employees to succeed and thrive. However, despite all this, one of the greatest obstacles to achieving all these is micromanaging.

Signs of Micromanaging

Micromanaging involves the leader in question acting as if their subordinates are incapable of doing the job. Such leaders give close attention and offer many helpful suggestions that dump all the responsibility of the subordinate without any authority and keep on checking everything their subordinates do. Micromanagers seldom practice and always criticize. On everything their subordinates do, nothing seems good enough. Good delegation is therefore the opposite of micromanaging.

Much has been written when it comes to the subject of micromanaging. It is a popular topic and one that is well discussed in management. Micromanagers do not have any other way rather than with that belief that no outstanding work will be done without their consent and intervention. Often, as a result of micromanaging, it leads to diminished team performance and a lack of accountability on all parts involved.

Manifestations of Micromanaging

Micromanagement happens across different spheres and has different scales. There is dominating and passive micromanaging. The dominant methods of micromanaging include taking over, verbal assault, anger, intimidation, and constant close instructions. Passive micromanaging can be just as powerful and difficult to recognize. Passive micromanaging may include vulnerabilities such as deception, caretaking, withdrawal, crisis orientation among others.

Characteristics of Micromanaging Relationships

There are bad relations build between micromanaging leaders and their employees. Micromanagers tend to collect employees that are caretakers – passive micromanagers. These employees may have a higher need for security and may be more willing to work for leaders who seem to have a tight handle on everything. However, in today’s modern world of work, workers must be willing to own their work and must be competent enough to deliver value to their customers.

The need for predictability goes hand in hand with micromanaging. Leaders may be forced to micromanage to ensure there are a stable environment and predictability in results delivery. These sets of behaviors prevent many people from taking risks and limits employees. It can prevent learning among employees because people try to avoid situations they are not thoroughly and well prepared on.

Micromanaging doesn’t necessarily mean it is bad, but in most cases, the price you pay for micromanaging is too high. If you are micromanaging, it is good you stop the practice. Some subordinates may fight back and work for micromanaging leaders to make the environment toxic and challenging. There is a mental state of low productivity that is caused by abuse and become more rigid to committing their time and energy of delivering new projects.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *