The Consequences of Micromanaging
Keeping a Close Tab on Employees May Lead to Mistrust
Apr 25, 2009
Managing a business and its employees can be a stressful situation. For those who have started a business from scratch, it may be even more difficult to let go of some of the managerial duties. However, micromanaging a business’ operations and its employees can have dire consequences on the health of an organization.
What is Micromanaging?
Managing can mean keeping a watchful eye on an organization and its employees. Micromanaging means taking that watchful eye one step further. For example, instead of trusting the employees to do the tasks they have been assigned, a micromanager would be constantly looking over the shoulder of the employees and checking up on them every step of the way.
Prevents Trust from Being Built
The existence of a micromanager at work will mean that employees no longer have a feeling of mutual trust between management and themselves. Employees want to feel that the manager trusts them to get the job done correctly and that they do not need to be watched during every little step of the job or project. If a manager does not trust the employee to get the job done, then why was the employee hired in the first place?
Employees who feel no trust will not be willing to share opinions, ideas or other information which could help the company meet its goals. Problem-solving will be kept to a minimum, as employees feel like they cannot contribute to the company as much as they may like.
Micromanaging Takes Time
Managers are already very busy. If a manager is closely watching every move each employee makes, how can that manager be taking care of items that he or she needs to do? Micromanaging takes a great deal of time, something that managers usually do not have a great deal of during the work day. Managers have reports, meetings and employee issues to deal with, why add micromanaging to the list?
Delegation is an Essential Part of Management
For some managers, it is about not being able to let go of tasks. However, a good manager surrounds himself or herself with employees that can take care of these tasks. Managers must learn to trust themselves to make the appropriate hiring decisions; that means hiring competent and capable employees who are able to perform tasks with little supervision.
Coaching, Not Micromanaging
As Kenneth Fracaro says in his article, The Consequences of Micromanaging, coaching may be necessary for a period of time, only until an employee is capable of taking on tasks alone. As employee competency grows, managers should be able to gradually lessen the close supervision they may have practiced at the beginning of the employee’s tenure with the company.
Although micromanaging may seem like a short-term solution to employee supervision, it only serves to add additional stress to both employees and managers. Managers who practice micromanaging have less time to work on other tasks and less time to work on the vision for the future of the company. By focusing on the long-term goals of the company and not micromanaging employees, managers will realize that coaching employees is the best way to ensure everyone feels valued.
 |
