9 ms·
Arguably micromanagement can be beneficial provided it's used effectively. What the article outlines are mostly examples of flagrantly poor micromanagement. Wi
by rl3 11y ago
Arguably micromanagement can be beneficial provided it's used effectively. What the article outlines are mostly examples of flagrantly poor micromanagement.
With hard-to-elucidate projects, it's probably not possible to have everyone precisely on the same page, especially in a large organization.
I'd say good micromanagement is best employed as a last line of defense against work that, for whatever reason is not living up to the vision or ideals of the project.
Good micromanagement is also not judgemental, and doesn't involve the micromanager being an asshole to people.
- alttab 11y agoIt's true - there is a time and a place... and a cost. Plan A is to avoid the need to micromanage. Plan B may be micro-managing, but in my book that's trading good will for short term results. This works when you maintain a high level of good will with your team, and doesn't when you're always optimizing for short term results.
- danieltillett 11y agoHaving been down the micromanagement path it is extremely difficult to avoid on projects that will kill the company if they go wrong. When you are running a business that involves taking one critical gamble after another you really don’t want to take the risk of anything going wrong. On the other hand I have managed in situations where this pressure didn’t exist and it was much more pleasant for me. I could just explain what was need, let the person come up with the best plan of attack, and if the project failed have a quiet chat afterwards on how thing might be handled better next time.
- kbenson 11y agoGood micromanagement isn't micromanagement, it's just management. At the point micromanagement is beneficial, that means either the manager should be doing that job or the employee should not be doing that job. Both of those are managerial failures.