What are the accurate definition, common signs, pitfalls of micromanagement and why it is a serious concern in all modern organizations?

Micromanagement usually refers to inappropriately close observation and/or control of a subordinate’s work.Employees see micromanagers as controlling, dictatorial, judgmental, critical, bureaucratic, snooping, and more.Most managers who are accused of micromanagement have an exceptionally difficult time seeing the behaviour of themselves.Micromanagers tend to focus on the how versus focusing on the outcome or the results.

The common signs of micromanagement

·         Dictating how employees should complete tasks

·         Providing rapid criticism

·         Correcting tiny details instead of looking at the big picture

·         Excessive supervision

·         Questioning employees’ judgments

·         Resisting delegation

·         Taking back delegated work before it is finished or if a mistake is found

·         Discouraging others from making decisions without consulting with them

·         Frequently asking for updates and checking in incessantly on progress

Some of the major pitfalls of micromanagement

Some of the most destructive effects of micromanagement include:

·         Employees fail to learn and adapt to new situations

·         Employee development is inhibited

·         Disengaged employees invest time, but not effort or creativity

·         Teamwork is negatively impacted and often destroyed

·         Relationships are stifled

·         Trust plummets

·         Promotes a dysfunctional and possible hostile work environments

·         Provokes anti-social behavior

·         Stress levels skyrocket and that may affect mental and/or physical health

Lastly, there are also external impacts that can have severely detrimental effects on a company’s reputation and brand. Skilled employees may defect to competitors, complain in social settings and outside observers (consultants, clients, interviewees, or visitors) may notice undesirable behavior that they recount it in their conversations.

Why micromanagement is a serious concern 

Micromanagement lowers morale, limits productivity and increases staff turnover. In the worst case scenario, micromanagement destruct  organizational  culture because employees expect their work will be scrutinized and reworked by their manager. Any creativity brought to the role is constrained or destroyed. Unfortunately, few micromanagers are ever aware that they are undermining their people with this kind of micromanagement behavior. The job of a manager is to ensure that the work within their domain is done as effectively and efficiently as possible. If that manager is attempting to dictate all actions and otherwise control the employees’ every move, the group cannot be efficient or effective.   Micromanagement is mis-management, and under it, the employees, their manager and the business suffers.

Micromanagement :

Is to try to control or manage all the small parts of (something, such as an activity) in a way that is usually not wanted or that causes problem.

The micro manager is the manager who must personally make every decision, take a lead role in the performance of every significant task and, in extreme cases, dictate every small step the workers take. To many employees the micro manager is, in modern parlance, a control freak. The micro manager hovers over people who are trying to get their work done and rarely, if ever, seriously considers their ideas and opinions. The only "original" thinking the micro manager recognizes is his or her own.

Micromanagement is readily recognized by employees, but most micromanagers don't think of themselves as micromanagers. Rather, they usually believe they're practicing good management. The micromanager is customarily authoritarian in outlook, taking the job quite seriously, accepting personal responsibility for everything that's done and generally following an approach that says, in effect, "The buck stops here." Most of the time the micromanager also firmly believes the adage that "If you want something done well, you've got to do it yourself."

The micromanager takes essential management practices to extremes and interferes with employees' ability to do their jobs properly, while creating undue stress for them. Outstanding examples are evident in the area of performance feedback. All employees need regular feedback on performance, though some need more detailed feedback more frequently than others. From the micromanager, however, feedback tends to be constant and detailed and often excessively focused on procedural minutia rather than on overall performance, quality and results.

In no other area are the shortcomings of the micromanager more evident––or more damaging––than in the practice of delegation essential to effective management, but the micromanager seems unable to delegate properly.

When it comes to delegation, a micromanager:

• Cannot delegate effectively or delegate at all
• Often hands out only the easy, boring or dirty tasks while delegating nothing of interest or importance
• May delegate, but put the employee in a position of deciding nothing of significance without prior approval
• May hand out work, supposedly delegating, but hover instead, providing detailed direction, dictating methods rather than providing proper preparation, making the employee responsible for results and not allowing him or her to figure anything out and learn by doing
• May hand out a task, but pull it back at the first sign of trouble, failing to provide the employee with a condition essential to growth and development: the reasonable freedom to fail.

Micromanagement is damaging to employees and eventually to the manager. It created stress and discontent among employees.

The effects of micromanaging are widespread. Employees can become resentful, allege they're being bullied, or actually start to perform badly due to the pressure.

"Some people don't perform very well when someone is breathing down their neck. The scrutiny can bring about an actual decline in performance when a person feels so pressured about making a mistake," Ms Faraday-Brash said.

Over time, micromanaging starts to stifle initiative.

"If a manager is scrutinizing someone closely and is disapproving of their ideas they can become disheartened," Ms Faraday-Brash said.

"In psychology it's called learned helplessness - a fear of sticking your neck out and getting in trouble.

Some employees stop taking initiative as a way to get back at their micromanager.

"They wait to be told what to do before they do anything," she said.

But the problem is hard to tackle because it's not always seen as a problem by senior leaders.

"People tend to get rewarded for demonstrating high levels of accountability. People think they have to know everything about everyone in every aspect of a business," Dr Kemp said.

"Micromanagers by definition are not open, they're rigid and stuck in their belief systems and their perspectives. We need to look at how we deal with the fundamental problem and the answer to that is a much deeper and complex intervention in their thinking.

Micromanager's critical effects:

• It inhibits employee development.No effort is made to challenge employees with learning situations. The micromanager delegates nothing of consequence, thus depriving employees of opportunity for growth. Because the micromanager often punishes mistakes, employees learn to hide their mistakes and avoid taking risks. The micromanagement style creates "yes men" or "yes women," as employees discover it's easiest and safest to go along with the manager.
• It limits the manager's promotional possibilities. The manager who is perceived as poor at delegation is often not considered for promotion to a level where delegation takes on even greater importance. Also, a manager who has done nothing to develop one or more potential successors is usually a poor candidate for promotion.

Consider, in addition to impaired promotional possibilities, other effects on the micromanager. The micromanager tries to do it all, only to eventually discover that this isn't possible. But on the way to that discovery the micromanager regularly works extra hours and can frequently be found at work on weekends or other scheduled days off. The micromanager also eventually discovers that work quality diminishes and that turnover increases as the better employees respond to the absence of challenge by looking for greener pastures. The micromanager is constantly flirting with the hazards of overwork and the problems of a demotivated work group.

It helps to remember at all times that a manager is there to ensure that the work gets done as effectively and efficiently as possible. If the manager is attempting to dictate all actions and otherwise trying to control the employees' every move, the group will be neither as efficient, nor effective as it could be under rational, enlightened management. Micromanagement is mismanagement, and under it, the manager, the employees and the business all suffer.

Micro-management : We use it to describe a wide range of behaviors, but the technical definition is someone who manages to too great a level of detail with too great of a frequency

Most of us are more familiar with the term “micro-management”, as it’s one of the more popular labels to attach to ineffective managers

The practice of micromanagement, believe it or not, is a double edged sword. It's a style of management which could either be very effective in certain situations or devastating in others. Most people when they speak about micromanagement only look at the negative side of it, and they are correct to do so because of the misuse of this practice by many incompetent managers. On the other hand, management gurus like Ken Blanchard states that micromanaging could be the most effective way of managing certain people.

It's like a medicine, if you take this medicine and you don't need it, it will harm you. However if you need this medicine and you don't take it, you'll stay sick. 

Now the question could be when is it bad to be a micro-manager and when is it good to be so?

Before I answer this question, let's take a quick look at the meaning of micromanagement. It simply means: managing the micro stuff - which means managing the small details. 

So, what kind of employee needs his boss to manage his details? The answer is: The kind of employee who can't manage his/her own details. If you can't do it, someone else should do it. And that someone else (your manager in this context) should show you and teach you all the small details that you need which you don't know of. It's like when you teach someone to drive. You can't just delegate driving to him or give him a big picture of how to drive, you sit next to him and you micro-manage his learning and driving process till he gets better and he masters the skill of driving. After that, you just tell him where to go and he drives perfectly to the destination. 

In the same way in management, if someone is competent regarding a certain task and knows how to do it in the right way up to the agreed standards and on time, then there is no need to micromanage this person. As a matter of fact if you micromanage him/her, it will be devastating for them and demotivating. Imagine you having a PHD in literature and someone comes and tries to teach you how to read the alphabet!!! Not a pretty picture. 

However if someone is not competent in doing a certain task either because they've never done it before, or because they've done it in a wrong way and nobody showed them the right way, then those people need micromanagement (involving managing and teaching them all the small details), they need to be shown the "How" not just the "What". When they become competent then no more micromanagement for them on this task, rather delegation with motivation. 

That's my personal view on this subject. 

microeconomics its the internal factors which effect the relationships between management and employees and its very important now as its key factor of success of employees relation and control their performance and also their needs and its more effective than macroeconomics as its the external factor and enter another parties as the unions which sometimes raise the employees benefits without raising their productivity

Thanks

Agree with your answer Mrs. Ghada

It is with no doubt that the management style you adopt in your organization as a manager or superior determines the success of the entire organization as a whole. There are several systems or styles of management, but in this article we are going to look at a management system known as micromanagement.

What is micromanagement?

As the name suggests, it basically means management on a minute scale. To elaborate, micromanagement can be defined as the management style whereby a superior (manager) imposes excessive control or monitoring on his/her subordinate. The manger or superior usually gives little or no opportunity for his subordinate to take any decision on their own without consulting him first, hence concentrating on minute details in the organization.

 In micromanagement system, the micro manager often tends to involve himself in every aspect of the day to day activities of the organization, giving no room for subordinates to influence activities or make decisions.

 Most micro managers tend not to notice their “over protective” system of management as they see it as an effective means of achieving perfection in the organization. To a certain extent achieving perfection from the point of view of the micro manager may be right, however, should focusing on minute areas of your organization at the expense of other important issues be the best in achieving organizational growth?

 Disadvantages of the micromanagement style:

 One major characteristics of a micro manager is his failure to delegate to his subordinates. Delegation is one of the keys to the success of an organization as delegation allows managers to pass on some portion of their work load to capable subordinates as they concentrate on other important issues in the organization.

 Micro managers are usually irritated when their subordinates make decisions without consulting them, and this sometimes tends to kill the initiative skills of workers/subordinates in the organization, as workers are scared of taking initiatives.

Another shortcoming of micromanagement is that it provides job insecurity to employees, as employees are afraid that due to the management style of the organization, their jobs may be on the line as they feel that management does not look at other important areas of the organization which would bring organizational growth and improved conditions of work to the employees. Yes it is true that when an employee sees that his manager (employer) is only focusing on trivial issues in the organization instead of looking at broader areas leaving him (employee) to do that (the trivial issues) only means that those other important issues wouldn’t be taken care of; hence the company might not be able to survive for the foreseeable future.

 Another disadvantage of the micromanagement system is that since it kills employee initiative, it would only have a retardation of the growth of the employee so many employees would jump bus at any available job opportunity that comes their way. So what is the meaning of “jumping at any opportunity” to the micro manager? What it simply means is that there would be a high labour turnover in the organization which is not healthy for the organization.

There is a general understanding, driving part of human nature that breed with humans. In other words, either to breed with him or not. Leadership is ((moving a group of people in a specific direction, and outline the process and it urged them to work by choice)). Successful leadership and move people in the direction in which to achieve their interests in the long run, no matter what, the means and the ends must be played to serve the larger interests of the people concerned and the reality in the long run. And also the leadership approach and skill, and work, aims to influence others and leader of a person is a person who occupies a certain position in the group, and expect him to perform his manner is consistent with that order, and the leader is the one who waits for him to exercise influence and power in determine the objectives of the organization or institution and fleshed out and achieve them. And the commander of the Secretary, who is the front row, and not the person who is maneuvering to lead the people. The commander-born leader naturally highlights as a leader, because the mental features, and spiritual and personality certainly give such a right without question. Both authors and writers like to begin identifying what are the leadership. But it is easy to say what it is not. It's certainly not a science. Leadership is not on par with the chemistry or physics, for example. Find knowledge comparable, it is not in vain, because we know a lot about the management.

A succesful management is the one that achieve,throuh people,the vision,mission,objective and operational target of any organization.

The factors for a successful management are:-

1.Good communication and interaction with the employees.

2.Have a good leadership skills.

3.Decision making ability.

4. Set goals for your employees ,measure and document their progress

5.Help your employees develop their skills and capabilities

6.Motivate employees to work and success

Thanks for the invitation My Dear Ghada.

A Smart Question with equally Smart Answers; nothing to add.

Micromanagement is managing and controlling of the employees by the managers  by close observation and monitoring and assessing every step invloved in the functioning of work. A good manager can keep a good vigil on his subordinates and can assess who is a good employee and who is not and can let the good employees to work themselves and can take corrective actions on those who are not performing well. A smart manger keeps track opf employees and knows who is what and without bothering good employees he can let them work with his positive notes. When he found some employees as liabilities it is his duty to warn them and pressure them to perform better or else to take appropriate action. Moreover, there is pressure from their superior management on managers to get the maximum result from their staff, especially like cost controling, improving sales, improving standards of service and product.