Micromanagement is a management style characterized by behaviors such as excessive focus on monitoring and controlling subordinates and an obsession with details. Generally, micromanagement is considered to have a negative connotation, suggesting a lack of freedom and trust in the workplace, with an excessive focus on details at the expense of the “big picture” and larger objectives.
Often, micromanagement arises from a narrow conception of project success, perfectionism, and the absence of any obstacles in achieving it. However, the fear of any error instinctively hampers the freedom of thought, expression, action, and even any initiative by employees. As a result, team productivity suffers.
What are the most common practices that reveal an attitude towards micromanagement? The lack of task delegation, frequent and unsolicited advice describing a single correct way to accomplish tasks, excessive attention to detail, overly frequent reports and meetings, and the concentration of power in the hands of one person.
The effect that motivates managers to adopt this style is that in the short term, it produces results. Projects become reality, and clients are satisfied. However, these same managers need to realize that this attitude is not sustainable over time. Teams will feel unappreciated, disrespected, and there will be staff turnover, leading to a new cycle of distrust, time, and resources spent on learning, etc. Employees who could take on increasingly larger responsibilities become demotivated, becoming dependent on feedback.
Macromanagement is an attitude at the opposite pole. It refers less to managing employees and more to managing the organization from a broader, future-oriented perspective. An organization practicing macromanagement highly considers the future of the organization, the future of society, and their mutual impact. Managers step aside and give employees the freedom to do their job as they see fit, as long as the desired result is achieved.
The disadvantages of macromanagement include a potential disconnect between managers and employees and a lack of understanding regarding employees’ roles and responsibilities. The most significant drawback is the impression of a lack of support, coupled with the burden of total responsibility. Sometimes employees need a leader to guide them, who is available for help and feedback, and who doesn’t leave them on their own just to implement a vision for the next ten years.
Both styles, when taken to the extreme, are equally useless to the organization and the employees. However, given that the primary management style in Romania is at the micro-level, we continue by presenting some ideas through which the organization can receive a fresh breath of air, managers a pause for reflection, and employees motivation.
The first step is to observe daily practices. Are there too many meetings, too long? Frequent reports? Critical feedback and drained employees? Perhaps it is necessary to try detaching for a while, offering trust, and measuring results again. The results might surprise you.
Delegating responsibilities is not learned overnight, does not feel comfortable immediately, and cannot be successfully implemented without a trial-and-error period. However, there are certainly people on every team who could do more and would like to do more if there were no fear of failure. Some can take on specific tasks, others projects or sets of tasks.
How can this be done? By modifying job descriptions, outsourcing, or even formal delegation – even notarized.
Initially, delegate small tasks for short periods and observe the results. If employees come up with new ideas, these should not be neglected; sometimes they know best what shortcomings they face. Outsourcing costs, but sometimes the time saved brings invaluable added value.
Business is an art, but it is also learned. Everything lies in moderation. In common sense, objectivity, and a bit of courage.
Author: Atty. Lavinia Rusu