Delegating & Micromanaging: Leading Your Team Successfully

Welfont Joe Johnson, Ph.D.
Entrepreneur. Investor. Startup Expert.

There’s a distinct difference between giving people control of particular tasks/projects and seemingly ceding control while still ensuring that everything is being done to your standards.

The first management style consists of delegating tasks/projects to direct reports and trusting that they have the ability and knowledge to successfully complete them. The second style, micromanaging, is a more control-centered approach where direct reports are constantly monitored and required to adhere to a rigid process.

The ability to delegate tasks doesn’t come easily to everyone, especially when one’s own, lovingly nurtured, business is at stake. Handing over the reins of even the smallest tasks can be scary and difficult. At the same time, doing so frees you to tackle bigger-picture tasks.

To successfully delegate, it’s essential to understand that getting things done is more important than having everything done precisely as you’d prefer.

WHAT IS MICROMANAGING?

Micromanagers are often referenced derisively. They are frequently portrayed as overbearing control freaks who require everything to be done their way and who maintain an eagle-eye on every aspect of every project. If you’ve ever read a Dilbert cartoon, you’re familiar with the concept.

Micromanaging involves personally checking every small detail and limiting an employee’s ability to make decisions.

Some people suggest that micromanaging can help employees to learn new skills or tasks safely. After all, if they have to follow rigid guidelines or report back after completing every minute step, they’re probably learning to perform exactly as they’ve been told to do. That said, there may yet be a better method which positively encourages employees to tackle projects to stretch their current skill sets. Let’s call this method “coaching”. With coaching, while there may be check-ins and helpful advice given, there shouldn’t be the sense that an employee’s actions are being constantly monitored or that they don’t have the ability to make decisions for themselves.

Most micromanagers don’t know that they’re micromanagers. This is problematic for individuals who are attempting to create a new enterprise. Entrepreneurs generally envision themselves as leading a new team to success with forward-thinking ideas. No one plans to hound subordinates as a means of ensuring that everything is done to their liking.

As an entrepreneur, how can you ensure that you approach your position as a positive leader and not as a micromanager? The first step is to identify some micromanagement traits and, should you find that you favor those tendencies, you’ll be aware that you need to work that much harder to overcome them. You may also want to hire a good manager who can handle the people side of your organization as a means of avoiding the temptation entirely.

MICROMANAGEMENT TRAITS

Micromanagers have a tendency to:

• Delegate only the simplest tasks. A micromanager may believe that a direct report doesn’t have the ability or knowledge to complete a task to their liking. They may feel that it’s faster to simply execute certain tasks themselves and to assign only small, nonessential tasks to direct reports.
• Require frequent check-ins on even the easiest tasks. Constantly monitoring direct reports and questioning both their progress and choices is a tell-tale sign of micromanagement.
• Control how tasks are performed. Companies have policies and procedures to ensure that decisions are made in a particular way and that tasks are completed appropriately. However, certain individuals habitually exceed the strictures of policy and procedure. They may require that certain tasks be handled in particular ways (i.e. the right way – which is the way that theywould do it) and take issue with any other offered solution, even should it accomplish the same desired result.
• Assign arbitrary deadlines. When a manager doesn’t trust that their direct reports will be up to a task, they may give them an arbitrary deadline. This serves to not only help them control the situation, but to help them feel as though they can fix any issues or complete the task themselves if necessary. Deadlines can certainly be useful tools to ensure that work is completed in a timely fashion, but employing deadlines for their own sake rarely serves any useful purpose.
• Do work that direct reports should be doing. There’s a difference between knowing the roles played by team members and understanding their responsibilities vs. personally completing their assigned tasks/projects. A manager should be concerned with his own projects and permit each team members to complete theirs.
• Spend an inordinate amount of time illustrating precisely how things ought to be done to people who should already know. Given that most team members are hired for their skill sets, once new employees are oriented at the beginning of their company tenure, they shouldn’t require constant training, supervision, or handholding. A case of “constant training” indicates that either a micromanager is involved or an employee is being assigned tasks beyond their abilities to complete.
• Spend more time supervising than working on their own projects. While managers should certainly support and supervise their direct reports, doing so shouldn’t account for all of their time. Managers must have time have to spearhead their own initiatives.
• Take credit for everything. Rather than allowing direct reports to share in any earned praise, they believe that they personally merit any and all acquired accolades.

NEGATIVE EFFECTS OF MICROMANAGEMENT

Some may feel that micromanaging is just a management style, however, it can constitute a destructive influence on an organization.

Micromanagement can lead to workplace frustrations, higher turnover as frustrated employees abandon ship, under-productivity, and other issues. Ultimately, these issues will all lead to a loss of profitability. High turnover means that you must hire and train a greater number of people; while under-productivity means that an insufficient amount of useful work is being done. Additionally, should you have a micromanager on your staff – or if you are one yourself – you may very well be negatively impacting your company’s potential for innovation and ideation.

Micromanagement can be viewed as a misallocation of resources. Time is not being well-spent and individuals are not being challenged to reach their maximum potential.