There are many ways to approach leadership, and they all have their respective strengths. But studies have shown that the micromanaging style is one that doesn’t work as much as people would want them to. It’s one thing to be hands-on and another to be overbearing, and often micromanagement tilts heavily toward the latter. For one, it often leads employees to think that the leader likes to always get things done his or her way. In effect, the staff is left thinking that they are not being trusted enough in the workplace. The office of the micromanager will have a palpable air of undue stress and endless scrutiny. Instead of employees focusing on the work, they spend much of the time being conscious of the boss’ presence. Image source: inc.com Because of micromanagers’ perceived need for complete control, productivity and business growth are often compromised. Healthy communication isn’t fostered, and employees don’t feel safe or confident confiding with the leader. Tasks, therefore, lose their fun and even meaning, and workers often just go about doing them in a robotic manner. Worse, micromanagement leads to dependence. Because employees are expected to bring every small matter to the manager, they lose both the ability to think for themselves and their passion for the job. Because they have been conditioned that constant guidance is what they need, that spark of needed creativity is lost. All in all, micromanagement is one of the leading reasons for high turnover rates in many companies. Image source: shift.newco.co Stephen Varanko III has been active in organizational leadership positions since high school. He has behind him a storied list of academic, athletic, and leadership accomplishments from his stay in Randolph Macon Academy. More leadership reads and musings here.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
|