Perspectives in Decision-Making
The Impact of Management Archetypes — Micromanagement
This article is aimed at providing perspective into various forms of leadership and management. The first few iterations will work through various archetypes or management styles. These archetypes were selected from the internet and are not meant to be comprehensive or complete — merely illustrative and thought-provoking.
This first article will focus on Micromanagement, a style with which most folks are familiar. Just to be sure, the micromanager is defined by their tendency to be hands-on, meticulous, and occasionally a bit controlling. They struggle with perceptions of trust and the ability to delegate.
How they rose to leadership?
Most micromanagers rose to leadership by being really good at the job their employees do. Few micromanagers are criticized for not be able to do the work themselves. The issue is most often that they do not allow their employs to do the job without intense scrutiny and intervention.
Micromanagers were typically so good at the work of their subordinates, they engage heavily trying to maintain the productivity and quality levels that they were able to achieve. They are often effective teachers and mentors but are often not very good managers or leaders.
How are their decisions influenced?
Leadership is about decision making and micromanagers nearly always have a strong bias. They want things done their way. On the positive side, this creates a lot of consistency in their decision making.
Consistency can be a good thing. Expectation and predictability are important components of a well-run business. A manager who is consistent, even if they consistently underachieve, can be trained, repurposed, or ultimately fired. Inconsistency creates more headaches and second guessing, but this is typically avoided by micromanagers.
Micromanagement often translates into leaders who are not open to new ideas, not willing to delegate or both. Sometimes they may be receptive briefly but will second guess that decision at the arrival of the first bit of adversity. The latter is actually worse than the former as it negates the consistency advantage we laid out earlier.
How does this influence prioritization?
Prioritization is one of the most important components of management. A micromanager prioritizes exacting execution over all other activities. They do this in two ways. First, they make it the priority of their teams. But, more importantly, they make this the focus of the highest paid asset on their team… themselves.
A micromanager prioritizes hands-on coaching and monitoring over most other things. This includes innovation, strategy, and development. They also lean heavily toward focused execution. It is difficult to multi-task when one does not like to delegate.
How can businesses best make us of micromanagers?
Micromanagers most struggle with assignments that require great scale or freedom. Leaders with a penchant hands-on and exacting management styles should be utilized in capacities that best leverage their strengths. They are skilled at roles that favor training, quality, and control.
They should be used in roles with smaller teams. Typically these teams will also be more junior. They should avoid roles with large scale or that require high levels of employee freedom and creativity.
Micromanagers have been promoted in your organization because they were great in lower roles. They are a valuable asset if they can be leveraged properly. To do this you must maintain perspective on how they make decisions.
Perspectives in Decision Making is a series created by Corsair’s Institute to provide the reader with a perspective on the decision-making process. For more articles like these — please subscribe to Corsair’s Business.
Quintessentially is an article format created by Corsair’s Institute to increase the reader’s comprehension of key concepts in a quick and engaging fashion. For more articles from Perspective, Quintessentially — click here.
