> No manager ever thinks of themselves this way. They usually think they can do each one of their reports' job better than they can, when it's rarely true. Not

> No manager ever thinks of themselves this way. They usually think they can do each one of their reports' job better than they can, when it's rarely true. Not every manager is like this. Good managers will be able to evaluate their team members' actual abilities, and adjust their approach based on what is actually going on. As a manager, if you are able to hire experts who know how to successfully coordinate amongst themselves—and want to coordinate without sabotaging each other in some way, and are able to stay on-task, and prioritize things properly—then you can and should leave them alone to work, after pointing everyone in the right direction. But who gets to decide if the people doing the work are really as good as they think they are? It's not just bad managers that delude themselves about their own abilities. Sometimes people need guidance or can benefit from guidance, but don't think they need it and are offended that you would even think they could benefit from it. A lot of people you hear complaining about micromanagement fall into this category. Not everyone who resents being closely supervised can be successful without close supervision. > The best managers I've ever had throughout my career were the ones who knew their own limitations and acted accordingly. Same here. I would wager, though, that the best co-workers and subordinates you've had also were those who knew their own limitations and acted accordingly.