"Divide and conquer"--micro managers approach?

Divide and conquer:Yes this is a dangerous principle in the job and should be replaced by the principle of (the whole produce) It is noted that this kind of corruption is not only used by the Director of the weak patient in particular belonging to work. So end up their breathtaking careers with termination of employment

With all respect to all, but not true...

 

Divide-and-Conquer is NOT in any way affiliated with Micro-Management. Any manager who feels that he/she need to Divide-and-Conquer, is because they feel that the people around him/her are more experienced and better prepared to take he/her position, creating fierce competition, which he/she can not handle.

 

Or when this manager feels insecure in his/her position, and the company has a pool of people that can be candidates for his/her replacement, so they resort to Divide-and-Conquer.

 

On the other hand, a Micro-Manager can be someone who loves what he/she does, and wants to make sure that the results are achieved. With low trust in others' capabilities, he/she would prefer to take on the task personally. 

 

The best manager is who can create a balance between Micro and Macro Management.

 

As for the manager who relies on Divide-and-Conquer, this is a less experienced manager who eventually get caught up with his pants down and get terminated.

Hello all !

First of all why , why we call him or she " leader " ? When you get to try to lead a team through this method you  afraid by something:

- the team are to strong and good for you

- you become comfortable not to say lazy

- you no longer interested in the team and good results, only you count

So ,  why we call him or she " leader " ?

Dismiss !

• transfer to a less important location

AGREED WITH ALL ABOVE............

Micro managers can't properly manage their staff due to natural inability to be reasonable, polite, fair and professional, they have to compensate all those lacking qualities by something else that will help to control their teams. 

Due to this kind of behaviour, their careers end in terms of the above mentioned reasons in the question.

Thanks for the invitation

Good question

In my point of view it,s

transfer to less important location

 

 

 

 

 

My answer it" total loss a control.Example a powerful leader may encourage a less powerful leader to make unwise financial decisions in order to drain the smaller resources.If the problem persists then this manager will have to be replaced.

Agree with all the answers

Divide-and-conquer approach is that of 

Paranoid leaders tried to thin the ranks of their teams of those that they believed were not loyal. There were only two “camps” of people, those that were “on board” and those that were not. What to do with the people on the bad list? Move them out, right? 

But that isn't as easy as it sounds. So the divisive steps taken by these leaders were to simply make life unbearable to the point that the impacted people either left on their own, or suffered in silence. 

Leaders with such disruptive & dangerous approach worth no future !

A divide and conquer strategy, also known as “divide and rule strategy” is often applied in the arenas of politics and sociology. In this strategy, one power breaks another power into smaller, more manageable pieces, and then takes control of those pieces one by one. It generally takes a very strong power to implement such a strategy. In order to successfully break up another power or government, the conqueror must have access to strong political, military, and economic machines. Furthermore, in order to maintain power and influence, large governments will often work to keep smaller powers and governments from uniting. In fact, this use of the principles within the divide and conquer strategy is most common. It is much easier to prevent small powers from linking forces than to break them apart once they have aligned. Leaders who use a divide and conquer strategy may encourage or foster feuds between smaller powers. This kind of political maneuvering requires a great understanding of the people who are being manipulated. In order to foster feuds, for example, one must understand the political and social histories of the parties intended to take part in the feuds. The strategy also includes methods with which to control the funds and resources of the small conquered parties. For example, a powerful leader may encourage a less powerful leader to make unwise financial decisions in order to drain the smaller power’s resources. This is often successful if the leaders of the smaller powers have inflated egos and delusions of grandeur. It is important to note that this form is only effective if the smaller power allows itself to be influenced by the larger power. The divide and conquer strategy has been widely used throughout history. Both the Roman empire and the British empire played small tribes and groups against one another in order to control their lands and territories. It was used by the Romans when they took Britain, when the British Empire took India, and when the Anglo-Normans took Ireland. A staple political strategy, divide and conquer is still used by many countries today. Here, in the U.S. it is the Liberals v. Conservatives, and Republicans v. Democrats. As they fight, the real enemy continues advancing!