The Fine Lines of Management
I was wondering if anyone out there can give me an example of being too bossy as opposed to "catering" to your crew you have to manage and being too "friendly" with them. I know a place I used to work at that always criticized management and tried to decipher that fine line, but nobody seemed to have a direct answer as to where or what that line was. In fact, the theory was hypocritical of the practice from what I learned through real-world scenarios.
I think anytime a boss is micro-managing an employee is an example of being too bossy. However, it depends on the experience and skill level of the employee. If the employee is new or the project is new then there is more need for supervision at first. However, if the employee is experienced and skilled then delegating a task and checking in is much more effective then constant supervision.
In terms of being too friendly, it's great to chat and get to know your employees but i think one can be too friendly when he/she starts to share personal stories. Deciding what is too personal to share is where that fine line comes in. A great way to think of it is whether or not you would share the same story with a stranger or with your grandmother?
Micro managing can be one of the worst traits of a manager. The really good bosses I've had in the past are skilled in a way that they empower you to make the right decision. They mentor you and allow you to make mistakes and then learn from them. I agree this does not always work, but for the most part, it separates the good managers from the poor ones.
Micromanaging in my opinion could be an indication of a lack of trust. Why hire qualified staff and then expect them to do things exactly as you would? What a waste of human capital and innovation. Micromanagers have experienced also burning themselves out since this is another form of unwillingness to delegate. This is not good for the manager or employee.
Wanda
Personally, I do not thrive with a micromanager as my supervisor. However, I feel that I have sometimes been forced to become a micromanager when a direct report continually underperforms and despite repested feedback sessions, does not improve.
Sheila, I have had the same experience. I dislike being micro-managed and dislike having to do it, primarily because it requires extra effort and time that is counterproductive to the whole point of having delegated the specific task to begin with. That being said, micro-management is at times warranted. As you noted, if a team member has repeatedly been under-performing despite training/coaching/etc., the onus is on me to get fully involved and "inspect what I expect" until the expected results are achieved.
Hi Liane,
Micro-management is a by-product of a basic trust issue with either the process, people or both. Managers who are hesitant to delegate work for fear that the final product wouldn't be as they would have done it are perfect examples of this theory. Personally, I allow quite a bit of latitude on the way things are done and put the biggest concern on deadlines and outcomes. This gives me time to role-model behaviors that my team could apply to their work. It is commonplace to have my instructors mumble to themselves "How would Marty do this". I am not saying I exist in a perfect world nor am I a perfect example of how to do things. I have issues just like any manager, but they are easier to solve if coaching and being a mentor is substituted for looking over peoples' shoulders waiting for something bad to happen...no matter how long it takes. If a team member doesn't respond to this then putting more heat on them will do no good either. That's the time to explore other options - like evaluating the capability and/or willingness of that person to do that job.
Good point, Martin. Definitely agree in providing latitude with the process as long as the final result is achieved. My team knows what is expected and I uphold myself to the same standards that I expect from them. The challenge I typically experience is with the final product not being in line with those agreed upon expectations despite repeated coaching efforts. This is when I have to provide more directive versus supportive coaching. Evaluating employee capability is another important factor as you noted. Sometimes, the employee just does not have the skill set to perform the task, which requires a whole other approach.
Isn't there some level where things must be micro-managed? By that I mean it seems that success depends on someone who has the task of really digging into the numbers and other data to make dollars and cents decisions and to help formulate best practices.
Let's not confuse micro-management with detail-oriented. Someone who has the ability to drill down and find solutions (most likely without being asked) would not fall victim to being micro-managed, but may to being taken advantage of. I believe one can't micro-manage numbers or other inanimate things - they are what they are. The people who interpret and analyze the numbers can be though.
