MICROMANAGEMENT

I recently saw a post on LinkedIn about micromanagement. It says that the fastest way to make your team quit is to micromanage them. That instead of micromanaging them, leaders and managers should focus on the results. The lack of autonomy results in demotivated employees as they feel undervalued and burdened while their leaders are closely monitoring their tasks.

There is some truth to this. When leaders and managers of an organization are watching every step an employee makes, it creates a feeling for the one being watched that he or she is not being trusted to do his or her job. It manifests a culture somewhat like a dictatorship as only the leader or manager has the correct way of doing it. That it shuts off any freedom from the employee to do what he or she needs to do the best way he or she knows how to.

However, there is another side to this. Why do leaders and managers employ this approach? Is it simply because they do not trust their employees to do what is necessary? Do they only want it done their way and not any other means the employee may come up with? Or something else may have triggered it for them to apply the tactic?

Not delivering results

As a leader or manager, it is their responsibility to ensure the team they handle is aligned with the organization’s goals and is doing what must be done to achieve them. It is one of the core responsibilities of those who lead a team to ensure that everyone is performing what is expected from them.

In a situation wherein a person is not delivering the output, may it be not at par with the quality deemed set or always able to finish it after deadlines, or even producing the bare minimum that it seems with a little more effort the work could have been done better, the leader must step in. He must understand what is going on so he could provide guidance to the person responsible for the task.

Once this started, it is a back-and-forth between the leader and the employee. A constant check on the progress of the employee, increasing reminders, more meetings, more and more discussions, and for those doing remote, more virtual calls. These are steps necessary to get the employee back on track.

However, if the employee continues to perform below expectations, the leader would always be breathing down his neck. With more emails, tighter deadlines, more checkpoints and touch bases, and more meetings. These are a few tactics a leader starts doing to get the most out of the employee.

And in turn, the employee feels suffocated. He feels there is no freedom for him to do his job. He feels that everything he is doing is dictated by his leader. He starts feeling demotivated as he is just like a robot to do his boss’ bidding. He starts thinking of quitting.

He did not realize that it was he who brought it to himself. The mediocre performance. The missed deadline. The quality of work that is below expectations. Continuing to deliver at a bare minimum. Not following instructions. Not performing the role he was hired to do.

Blaming it on others

We hate to take ownership of whatever is happening to us. We always find someone else to blame. There is always a reason outside our control that we make as an excuse for not being able to do what is asked from us.

And this other side of micromanagement is being hyped that leaders should not do it as it creates a negative impact on employees. That by saying this mere statement, it means that leaders are always mistaken for applying this approach.

Well, it is not always like that. We, employees, should also look into ourselves. Micromanagement is a tactic that can be employed to manage performance and output. By that definition, if performance and output are suffering, the method can be used.

So, have you asked yourself, before you all go feeling demotivated, depressed, and think about leaving, did you bring it to yourself? Have you been delivering the output of your work according to what is expected? Could you honestly say you have done enough to at least exceed a little bit the expectation of your boss?

If not, then that is the problem.

Micromanagement is a method

Micromanagement is a method used to ensure the team is on the right path in achieving the goals of the organization. It is done to get people who are straying off the track back on the train and be part of the team that will accomplish what they are pursuing together.

It is not something to condemn. The leaders who employ this do not need to be branded as bad leaders that foster distrust in team members. It is not a bad thing to do. It is an approach that must be done to get the results from those who are not able to do so.

Employees must be given the autonomy and freedom for them to do what they were hired for. They should be trained, given the necessary tools, and left on their own to work things out. Anyway, that is what they were hired for. To fulfill the job of the role. In addition, an employee will not find himself happy on the job if he is constantly being monitored for every action he makes.

And that is when micromanaging does not apply. If the employee is performing, producing quality outputs, meeting deadlines, and exceeding expectations even for just a little bit, then that employee will gain the freedom and autonomy he is privilege to.

It is a two way street

It is not always the leader. It is not always the manager. No one is inherently bad. Everyone is doing what they think is right and good. Let us not condemn or brand those leaders who use this tactic.

We need to deliver and be trustworthy enough to be able to do what we want to do. We must deliver. We must walk the path towards the goals. We must meet the expectations. We must be worthy.

By being one, micromanaging is just a word in a management book that can be forgotten and lost. Because if we all strive to do what is we were set to do, then we can all be better than who we are yesterday.