Δευτέρα, 29 Ιουλίου 2013

Micromanagers: Flushing Companies Down the Toilet, One Detail at a Time

Brilliant article by: Mrs Jessica Marie Storyteller. Product Marketer. Business Designer.

People don’t leave bad companies. They leave bad bosses. They don’t leave flawed organizational structures and abandon lousy products and technology. They leave flawed leadership.
No matter how brilliant a company’s products and/or services may be, if management is dysfunctional, that company will have serious problems. It may not be immediate, but it’s nearly a guarantee that it will happen. This concept may sound like a no-brainer, but it continues to happen across all companies and industries, both big and small.
There is so much emphasis on IQ in organizations, and not enough on leadership. Now we have a bunch of technological geniuses who are socially and emotionally inept.
The problem? A complete lack of emotional intelligence, insecurity, and sheer incompetence on the most basic level.
Leaders set the tone of an organization. The outer environment is a reflection of the inner environment of those who establish the quality of the company. When the leader(s) are chaotic and manage without a solid foundation or strategy, the whole operation turns into fire drills, with everyone running around like beheaded chickens.
The only thing this creates is a sustained profile of hysterics and frustration.

The Dangers of Micromanagement

Micromanaging is a method of management in which an individual closely observes or controls the work of an employee. In comparison to simply giving general direction, the micromanager monitors and evaluates every stage in a process, from beginning to end. This behavior negatively affects efficiency, creativity, trust, communication, problem-solving, and the company’s ability to reach its goals.
The typical micromanager spends their time directing employees rather than empowering them. They are often very insecure. They spend more time with the details of business operations instead of planning the company’s short-term and long-term growth strategies. The fact of the matter is, time DOES equal money. When the designated leader of an organization is wasting time (and therefore money) on overseeing projects instead of focusing on specific growth opportunities, it’s time to reevaluate a few things.


The effects of micromanagement can be disastrous for a company’s culture. Employees will soon realize that you are not listening to them. They will undoubtedly shut down, stop making suggestions or going to you with questions. Ultimately, employees will become disenchanted and will eventually quit to work for another company.
Much of the time, these quasi-leaders believe that they are the only ones who understand the business model and are the sole reason for the company’s revenue. They will often surround themselves with passive people who don’t question their authority, and fail to challenge or criticize their actions. These managers also tend to be extremely closed-minded to new approaches or ideas to solve problems.
It is for all these reasons that these types of managers will never hold a high level position at a large company. Of course, exceptions are noted, we often hear of executives who behave this way, but for the most part, they just do not possess the characteristics required to deal with projects and people in a productive and meaningful way.

Micromanagers want things done in a particular way. We all do - the “right way” – translation – “my way”. However, when these managers communicate requirements, they’re simply telling them to execute. In this case, they’re not asking anyone to think for themselves. And employees who actually engage in their work, won’t be satisfied for very long.
Managers certainly do not always have the best and brightest answers. Letting employees become part of the decision process is so important for increased productivity and helping everyone feel valued.

Underlying Problems

The underlying psychological issue of micromanagers is that most action (perhaps reaction is a more appropriate description) is based on fear, not reason or evidence. This causes major problems. First and foremost, their fear drives their need to control the details in processes, and their need for constant recognition. It’s not uncommon that most people who work with micromanagers have adapted their own behavior to try and prevent confrontation. However, enabling these issues only makes the problem worse.
There is also a failure to prioritize, making managerial and operational rhythms suffer. “Post-mortem” meetings become the norm, rather than after-action reviews. Blame is thrown in every direction except the manager’s and turnover gets worse.


Δεν υπάρχουν σχόλια:

Δημοσίευση σχολίου