Thou Shalt Not Micromanage… or Shalt Thou?

If there is such a thing as the Ten Commandments of Leadership etched in stone somewhere, I bet one of them is, “Thou Shalt Not Micromanage.” In a recent conversation with a leader of a technology firm, we discussed how the term “micromanagement” immediately evokes negative thoughts and feelings. For good reason, it can cause some of us to twitch with anxiety as we think about that boss we’ve experienced who stuck his or her nose too far into the details of our job. But is every single occurrence of micromanagement bad? Does a leader automatically violate one of the Ten Commandments (of Leadership) if s/he engages in micromanagement?

There are times when thou shalt micromanage, but it is the responsibility of wise leaders to only do so when it is appropriate and will have a positive impact on the organization and those around us. Consider these five common situations you’ll find micromanagement at work. You’ll quickly recognize where “thou shalt not” and where “thou shalt”:

Control. This is the classic and all-too-common case of micromanagement. It’s the boss who needs to be large and in charge. It’s the boss who, perhaps out of a sense of insecurity or a deep-seated inferiority complex, must control most every aspect of the organization (or department). Symptoms may include high turnover among direct reports, lack of staff professional development, absence of creativity, plenty of second-guessing and distrust. This boss always has the final say and is typically surrounded by those who tend to agree to get along.

Competency. Micromanagement is required when the direct report lacks competent skills. To make sure the organization (or department) continues to function at a high level, the leader must step in and “pick up what is being dropped” by the incompetent employee. Symptoms may include the employee not knowing or not caring that someone must make up for their own incompetence. Whether this was a poor hire, the role outgrew the employee, or something has de-motivated the employee, this micromanagement should only be short-lived until a change is made.

Capacity. Every organization, no matter the size, can always use more resources, right? In some situations, a lack of resources can require micromanagement. A leader must pay close attention to detail and exert a high degree of control in a certain area simply because there are not enough people or hours in the day to get something done. A key differentiating factor here is that the micromanagement is task-focused, not people-focused. In other words, the leader is taking on additional work because it would otherwise not get done. This contrasts with the controlling leader who gets into details that can and should be handled by others. When capacity is an issue, micromanagement can be a short-term solution.

Coaching. This situation is similar to competency, except that in this scenario the employee can grow and wants to grow. In the short-term, the leader needs to step in and provide assistance or exert control at a granular level as a means of coaching and mentoring. The leader’s goal is to build up the knowledge, skills and abilities of the team member as effectively as possible for the benefit of everyone involved. If a leader micromanages in this situation for long, it is not really coaching. In reality, it is a matter of control or competency.

Crisis. There are rare, but urgent, situations that may pop up that require detailed involvement from an expert, a seasoned leader who has seen this particular type of crisis before. The leader steps in to quickly take charge only because s/he has the knowledge to address the situation. Time is of the essence. These are the times when even the most empowering leaders know that they are uniquely qualified to dive in and solve a crisis. Too much is at stake for them not to.

Take a few moments to reflect. Which of these micromanagement situations have you personally experienced? Do you see yourself reflected in any of these? Are you facing any of these situations where you actually need to step in to micromanage? (My guess is that classic controlling leaders already bailed on this article or never even started reading it.) In what other situations – good or bad – have you seen micromanagement at work?