|
Micromanagers
| Micromanagers
Have you ever worked for a boss who had to watch your every
move? Someone who scheduled countless meetings which involved
dozens (or more) people? A "manager" who always seemed to want
to do your job for you, or, worse, who always knew what was
wrong and didn't hesitate to let you know? What about the
manager who has to approve every dollar you spend, even small
things like staplers?
These are micro managers, and they are one of the worst things
that can happen to an organization. A micro manager can start
with an excellent team of incredible producers and change them
into a useless group of disorganized, unmotivated, complainers.
I've worked for micro managers before and it's always been a
miserable experience. One was a man named Gary. This "manager"
was the owner of the company, and seemed to always be hovering
over my shoulder, demanding to know what I was doing and making
"suggestions", giving orders and sometimes just jumping in and
doing the work himself.
Working for Gary was one of the most miserable experiences of my
career, especially because his micro managing tendencies got
worse as time went on. He would show up at client meetings
totally unprepared, make comments at meetings that had nothing
to do with anything, and had to approve every penny of
expenditure.
Worse yet, when something went wrong it was funny how no one was
responsible, lest of all him. He would just jump in and "fix it"
(usually making it worse) and have this air about himself
silently saying "I knew I couldn't trust you guys".
His "know it all" attitude cost us at least one major client and
several contracts. Those of us who worked for him (and it was
clear that we worked for him) were afraid to make any mistake
lest it be driven into the ground, and dreaded the days when he
decided he "had to take a look at what we were doing" to "be
sure we were doing it right".
Sigh. Finally I wised up and moved elsewhere. I learned that
trying to work with a micro manager is a futile waste of time -
there is no such thing as "working with them" and they do not
even understand the concept.
So what are the signs of a micro manager?
Constantly checking up on your team members - The micro manager
has a need to be behind everyone's back at all times. He or she
wants to know what their team mates are doing at all times, and
will correct even the smallest thing without hesitation. Micro
managers tend to hover around their team members, making sure
that everything is "done right".
A good manager hires and trains people such that they are
intelligent and motivated enough to get their jobs done. There
is virtually never a need to treat people like robots - treat
them like intelligent human beings.
Demanding to be a part of all meetings involving your team
members - Micro managers insist on being part of every meeting,
no matter how unimportant, so they can be sure they can control
what's happening. In those meetings, you can count on a barrage
of constant comments, questions and orders from this manager on
the most trivial of subjects.
Better managers understand that they have team members who know
what they are doing and allow them to do what is necessary
without a constant need to know every detail. It's surprising
sometimes, but most people want to do a good job and will thrive
if given the opportunity.
Constantly scheduling meetings to "know what's going on" - Not
only does the micro manager want to be a part of every single
meeting, he wants to schedule lots and lots of meetings. This
gives him plenty of opportunities to correct all of the issues
"before they become problems".
Perhaps the most unneeded and useless type of meeting is the
"weekly status meeting" which involves all of the members of a
team. Good managers communicate so well with their team members
that they always know what's going on and thus do not need these
types of status meetings at all. When they do have them, the
purpose is more to let their team members know what's happening
instead of the other way around.
Inviting lots of people to meetings which are scheduled often -
Micro managers usually have no idea what they are doing, and
thus don't know who needs to be at a meeting. Thus, they tend to
invite everyone on their teams, and anyone else that they think
might want to be involved.
Virtually all meetings are unnecessary, and most people invited
to those meetings which are important do not need to be there.
Good managers understand this and thus limit their meetings to
those that are necessary. They also only invite those people who
actually have contributions to make or who really need to know
what's going on.
Not delegating authority - The micro manager will never actually
delegate any authority. He will pretend to do so, but never
will. This is the CEO who still orders office supplies, the CIO
who must approve every expenditure no matter how small, or the
supervisor who insists on approving every change to the line.
Funny how the groups managed by these guys can never seem to get
anything done ...
Excellent managers delegate authority to their team members. For
example, if they hire an office manager, then that office
manager is given the authority to stock the supply cabinet.
There is no need to personally check over each order to be sure
the proper supplies are being ordered.
Not delegating tasks - One of the most critical parts of any
manager's job is to get other people to do work. This means ALL
tasks must be delegated, except for those tasks directly related
to getting other people to do their jobs. Managers are like
movie directors or orchestra conductors - they do not act in the
movie or play an instrument in the orchestra: they get others to
do this PROPERLY and in harmony with the other players.
Approving every expenditure - A micro manager has trouble
delegating spending authority, so much so that oftentimes even
five dollar expenditures must be personally approved by him. The
clever micro managers want "reports" of all expenditures
instead, but will chew out someone on a moments notice if
anything comes across in the report that is unexpected.
The great managers delegate spending authority by creating a
system of authorities and limits. As long as spending is within
the guidelines, it is acceptable for the team members to spend
without approval.
Doing actual work instead of managing - The job of a manager or
supervisor is to manage people. One of the most important parts
of their job description is "managing" or "supervising". This is
also one of the hardest points for many people to understand,
especially people who have been promoted up the line. They are
not supposed to DO, they are supposed to get others to DO.
Except on the very smallest of teams, managers who are taking
part in tasks on a regular basis have not delegated effectively
and are not doing their own jobs ... and they are not letting
other people do their jobs as well.
That's the key point about good managers - they understand that
their job is to manage and/or supervise. They are not "doers"
they are people who get other people to do the right things at
the right times to the correct level of quality.
All hiring and firing decisions must be personally approved -
This is one of the signs of a real micro manager. He has
"delegated authority" for an area, but refuses to allow his
supervisors to make decisions about who to hire. He must perform
a second job interview himself to "be sure the person is right
for the organization". He will personally write the
advertisement for monster.com, insist upon interviewing everyone
himself, and "gently guide" you into hiring the person he wants.
He will question every single termination decision mercilessly,
effectively preventing you from firing all but the utterly
malicious basket cases.
Good managers delegate hiring and firing authority to their
supervisors and managers. It is perfectly acceptable for a good
manager to interview the one or two prime candidates for a
critical position, but he understands he does not need to
personally check out each and every decision himself.
You see, when a manager insists of interviewing each potential
new hire himself and will not allow his supervisors to make
firing decisions, he effectively removes a major portion of the
supervisors authority (at least in the eyes of the people he
supervises). It's clear to everyone that the supervisors
authority is limited and thus he can be challenged, ignored and
made more ineffective. In effect, his authority is dramatically
undermined.
Conclusions - So what do you do about a micro manager? Either
"fix him", get a new job or transfer to a different department.
Little is more miserable than working for the micro manager, and
if you cannot correct him, leave him to his misery.
If a micro manager works for you, then you must insist he
correct his micro managing tendencies immediately. This person
is destroying your team, reducing your profits, damaging your
credibility and dramatically increasing your turnover.
About the author:
Richard Lowe Jr. is the webmaster of Internet Tips And Secrets
at http://www.internet-tips.net - Visit our website any time to
read over 1,000 complete FREE articles about how to improve your
internet profits, enjoyment and knowledge.
|
|
| |