The Disease of Micromanagement

The concept of leadership derailment — specifically, how inappropriate and ineffective behaviors driven by arrogance can cause a leadership career to unravel over time — was the focus of my Coach’s Corner article in the January/February issue of PLJ. In this issue, I will focus on another derailer: micromanagement. I will explore what micromanagement is, what its symptoms are, why it occurs, and what to do about it.

The Definition of the Disease

The Free Dictionary defines micromanage as “To direct or control in a detailed, often meddlesome manner.” Merriam Webster’s description is “To manage with excessive control or attention to details.”

These definitions belie the seriousness of this disease because micromanagers not only control the minor details of day-to-day operations, but also they are “hooked” on being in control. While micromanagement is not intended to be malicious, it can be a toxic management style that negatively impacts the workplace. It is a style rejected by those who are self-motivated, driven to succeed, and want responsibility and accountability — in other words, the majority of physicians.

The Leading Causes

In his book Severed Trust,(1) George Lundberg states that society historically has given special status to certain professions because the members of those professions “must gain the most intimate knowledge of the person’s mind, body, and even soul.” Medicine is one of those professions. Furthermore, to succeed in the competitive and professionally demanding field of medicine, physicians’ need for personal achievement must far exceed that of the general population.

Leaders who micromanage have two flawed beliefs: 1)“I can do the work better than others,” and 2)“The judgment of others cannot be trusted.” In Coaching as a Leadership Style, I explain that physicians are a unique breed because they fall into the category of what is termed the “elite professional.”(2)

The elite professional emerges from a combination of a high-achieving individual working within a prestigious profession. When elite professionals are thrust into leadership positions, they are particularly susceptible to the disease of micromanagement.

Symptoms and Their Effects

In a 2019 research project to develop and validate a micromanagement scale, Hume determined the following behaviors are indicative of a micromanager:(3)

• Nitpicky with details; controls every aspect of a project.

• Requires conformity to his or her approach because it is “always the best.”

• Requires frequent and detailed updates that do not impact the quality of work.

• Second-guesses the decisions of others.

• Spends excessive time monitoring projects.

• Controls daily operations, regardless of frequency or importance.

• “Spies” on people’s work.

• Is a perfectionist with little or no tolerance for mistakes.

• Delegates only when necessary and then pulls back at the first hint of trouble.

• Uses an authoritative or even coercive approach by dictating precisely what and how something should be done when it is delegated.

• Is overly critical; sees and communicates only about the flaws in people’s work.

• Requires most, if not all, approvals go through him or her.

• Is suspicious about how people spend their time.

• Distrusts the competency of others.

• Assumes control of all critical projects and decisions.

While any one of these behaviors may be appropriate in a specific situation, when taken as a whole, they suggest micromanagement, which can have a significant negative impact on the work environment. Research confirms the negative effects of micromanagers, including unnecessary bottlenecks, stifled creativity and initiative among direct reports, lack of professional development among employees, low morale, disengagement, high turnover, and reduced quality of work.(4)

The Cause and the Cure

Any behavior can be changed; however, it is not always easy to change micromanagers’ behavior because of the etiology of this disease. Fundamental to the cause of micromanagement is a desire for personal achievement that produces consistent thoughts and concerns about attaining personal excellence in valued activities. Incorporated within this thought pattern is an intense fear of failure. The drive for personal excellence and the fear of not achieving are the root causes of the destructive behaviors listed above.

The challenge of overcoming micromanagement is further complicated because the mindset and behaviors that accompany it have worked for the individual in the past and have fostered success. In truth, it is often the reason that elite professionals rise to positions of leadership: Their ability to get things done, combined with their technical or functional expertise, helps them ascend the career ladder.

For example, in medicine, a reputation as a clinician or researcher often launches individuals into leadership positions. The assumption is that people who are excellent individual contributors will make good managers or leaders in their area of expertise.

Unfortunately, this is not always the case because elite professionals often overcorrect by trying to replicate what got them promoted in the first place: maintaining control over everything and imposing their perfectionistic standards on others. Given that they know of only one approach for success, they lack the flexibility to modify their behavior to fit their new role.

The Treatment

As is true for any behavioral change, coaching or mentoring a micromanager begins with his or her recognition that change is needed. When people are unaware or unconvinced of the need to change, little or no progress will be made. Even when the micromanager recognizes that his or her management style must change, taking the steps is difficult because they are at odds with the high achiever’s personality structure. That said, here are some ideas to consider:

1. Help micromanagers understand that what got them there is not what keeps them there. Many healthcare organizations mistakenly assume that when competent physicians are promoted, they know what the new role requires of them. Indeed, leaders in healthcare organizations do a lot of things; however, the leaders’ primary purpose is to influence others to get things done, rather than being the hub of a wheel from which everything must flow. When leaders understand that the actions that made them successful as individual contributors may sabotage their success as leaders, their inherent fear of failure can motivate change.

2. Keep the steps toward change small. Micromanagement is not a disease that can be cured by going cold turkey. It must be whittled away by tackling just one or two micromanagement behaviors at a time. For example, the first step can be simply decreasing the number of meetings called or approvals needed. Select a specific micromanagement behavior and focus on that for a time before moving on. Remember, micromanagers must learn that success is possible without over-controlling people and processes.

3. Differentiate the trivial from the essential. Learning to focus on the most important things, not everything, is necessary for all managers and leaders, but it is crucial for micromanagers. Encourage them to distinguish between the priority projects, tasks, and decisions and the mundane. The lesson here is “Don’t major in minors!”

4. Follow up frequently. The transition out of micromanagement is not a linear process. It is not one-trial learning. It requires a certain amount of trial and error followed by adjustment based on that experience. Meet with the person regularly to assess what is working and what is not, then readjust strategy and tactics as needed.

5. Provide feedback. Micromanagers generally are not aware they are micromanaging because it seems so natural to them. Observation and feedback will be critical to keeping them on the path toward change. Use follow-up sessions to reinforce positive change and point out micromanagement patterns that are still occurring. The message derived from follow-up sessions is that their transition away from micromanagement is important to you.

Summary

Micromanagement is a disease that can have such an acute adverse effect on people that, if untreated, it can derail a leader’s career. Unfortunately, it is an affliction to which elite professionals are prone. Because this disease is intertwined with patterns of behavior that have been successful in the past, it is difficult to cure.

Micromanagers must abandon ways of working that have been successful for them as individual contributors. Specifically, they must 1) give up control and 2) learn to trust others — both of which are difficult.

When coaching a micromanager, remember that patience, persistence, and discipline are crucial. It is also important that you, as their coach-leader, do not have the same disease that you are trying to cure in them.

References

1. Lundberg GD. Severed Trust. New York: Basic Books; 2002.

2. Hicks RF. Coaching as a Leadership Style: The Art and Science of Coaching Conversations for Healthcare Professionals. New York: Routledge; 2014.

3. Hume H. Micromanagement Scale: Development and Validation. Unpublished master’s thesis. Illinois State University, Normal, IL; 2019.

4. Sanaghan P. How Higher-Ed Leaders Derail. Denver: Academic Impressions; 2018.