The rationale for micromanagement is very confusing; especially when you consider the fact that the company has hired those individuals in the first place. If you don’t trust someone, and their skills/experience, then don’t hire them. It is as simple as that!
In that sense, an effective hiring process should negate the need for micromanagement completely, since you can be assured that it is watertight in being able to find the best talent. If your recruitment process is failing to spot warning signs early on, then it probably needs a shake-up.
Of course, no candidate is ever the finished article, and we can all improve our range of skills and competencies, especially when it comes to adapting to the bespoke requirements of the new environment. That means that companies should be well-versed in being able to provide the initial training that makes employees able to act in an autonomous manner into the future.
Just as micromanagement is an admission of a failed recruitment system, it is also a sign of inadequate initial training (as well as Continuing Professional Development, CPD). CPD ensures that professionals are given the latest insights and wisdom in their field, which in turn can allow them to keep practising their craft in an autonomous manner (without someone constantly looking over their shoulder in order to adjust).
Naturally, we are not saying that employees should not be expected to perform and meet expectations. That is definitely their side of the bargain; especially when they are being remunerated and rewarded in accordance with such. But there are better or worse ways to measure this—the latter of which can lead to a sense of micromanagement.
This comes down to how we define “productivity”. Too often that is regarded as factors such as keyboard strokes, rather than value-adding output. The truth is, 5 minutes of quiet contemplation might create that $m idea (which of course would never be achieved with the equivalent time bashing the keyboard). In that sense, it is monthly KPIs and deliverables, rather than the daily minutiae, that should be used to measure performance and productive value.
This should be one of creativity, ideation, innovation, and communication. You might have first-hand experience of how demoralising it can be to work in an environment where you are told to “get on with what you are paid to do”, and never allowed to contribute new ideas on how to improve the efficiency and efficacy of systems, nor on how to improve the customer experience and their resultant satisfaction.
Bright and agile minds often leave such a place of work quickly, because they lack the outlet needed for mental stimulation. Companies, therefore, need to think clearly about the sort of workplace culture that they are creating—because, one thing is for sure, in the context of crippling micromanagement, it is not only employees who will suffer, but, by extension, company profit and market share as well.
There is a difference between being available and being insufferably present all of the time. Micromanagement does not make people feel supported; but rather suffocated. You can let staff members know that you care about them and their development, without needing to stand over their shoulder all of the time.
Companies can shun micromanagement by letting employees know that, if they have a question or point of confusion, or even a health/personal problem, then they are welcome and encouraged to come forward and discuss. That is a much better and more sustainable approach (as compared with being intrusive at all times).
— — — — —
Mathew Warboys
🌏 Leading a Recruitment Revolution and Trusted Business Certification
Are You a CEO, Employer, Recruiter or Entrepreneur that would love your Business to be branded as a Trusted Employer or a Trusted Recruiter?