Is micro Management fair?

In circumstances where experienced individuals are focusing on profitable outcome for some task, but wait there is a Manager assigned who intends to micro manage activity of each individuals, leads to frustration and unrest even though new Manager is intending final goal to be met within time lines.

In such a scenario where members of the team are focused and know what to do , is micro management feasible? or let individual do thier thing and raise concerns when goals are not met on estimated deadlines?

PS - Micro Management in layman's terms is tracking and questioning each individuals progress on day to day basis.

Going on the broad premise that every thing has its pros and cons, I say -

Micro Management has its uses. Take a team of 10 individuals, very capable, and handling different projects at the same time. Each of them is assigned a responsibility of completing the tasks and each has a different degree of importance/ priority. Day A, project xyz could be critical, and the performance of Team Member No. 7 is crucial. Team member No. 7 is handling four projects, and each of them is equally important.

Having a Micro Management in this scenario helps. This Manager can coordinate better, keep reassigning responsibilities in such a manner that all deadlines are met on time. A reminder that Project xyz needed delivery today will help Team Member 7. The Manager can juggle the other project so that Team member 7's input in the other project is deferred to another day or another time, to ease the situation.

While individuals, undoubtedly focussed and responsible, are looking at achieving targets and goals, sometimes, they lose sight of the bigger picture (repeat - sometimes). Micro Management helps keep sight of Macros.

Of course, this Micro Management will be best utilitsed if the Manager recognizes that every team member is responsible and reminders/ follow ups be done in a manner conducive to team work. No one likes a sword hanging on their head all the time.

Originally posted by: greatmaratha

Going on the broad premise that every thing has its pros and cons, I say -

Micro Management has its uses. Take a team of 10 individuals, very capable, and handling different projects at the same time. Each of them is assigned a responsibility of completing the tasks and each has a different degree of importance/ priority. Day A, project xyz could be critical, and the performance of Team Member No. 7 is crucial. Team member No. 7 is handling four projects, and each of them is equally important.

Having a Micro Management in this scenario helps. This Manager can coordinate better, keep reassigning responsibilities in such a manner that all deadlines are met on time. A reminder that Project xyz needed delivery today will help Team Member 7. The Manager can juggle the other project so that Team member 7's input in the other project is deferred to another day or another time, to ease the situation.

While individuals, undoubtedly focussed and responsible, are looking at achieving targets and goals, sometimes, they lose sight of the bigger picture (repeat - sometimes). Micro Management helps keep sight of Macros.

Of course, this Micro Management will be best utilitsed if the Manager recognizes that every team member is responsible and reminders/ follow ups be done in a manner conducive to team work. No one likes a sword hanging on their head all the time.

👏👏 very well put.

Problem lies there @bold, when the manager doesn't guage the potential and wants to enforced micro management. It impacts negatively to performers. Typical example is when an statement of worked is assigned to 2-3 years experienced developer as a proactive manager one would get daily status, review effort and provide feedback on daily basis. Good thing :) For an 8-9 experienced is such daily intrusion is done by PM before dead lines fair? incoorporating review comments, when not the right time acts more as an overhead to productivity.

As an manager I will always track activity of 8 -9 years perfomer after estimated deadline is met ,no point in bothering in between. Said that I can say with younger generation with immense competitive talent / potential micro management is a thing of past or is a over head. :)

Originally posted by: raj5000

👏👏 very well put.

Problem lies there @bold, when the manager doesn't guage the potential and wants to enforced micro management. It impacts negatively to performers. Typical example is when an statement of worked is assigned to 2-3 years experienced developer as a proactive manager one would get daily status, review effort and provide feedback on daily basis. Good thing :) For an 8-9 experienced is such daily intrusion is done by PM before dead lines fair? incoorporating review comments, when not the right time acts more as an overhead to productivity.

As an manager I will always track activity of 8 -9 years perfomer after estimated deadline is met ,no point in bothering in between. Said that I can say with younger generation with immense competitive talent / potential micro management is a thing of past or is a over head. :)

Thanks. 😳

I say that the problem lies with those who select Managers. Not everyone is a good Manager and has the potential to extract the best out of his team.

Unfortunately, in todays day and age and competition, people give more value to titles, position, place on the corporate ladder, salary and other considerations. People dont understand that they must find the slot they fit in best and that slot can be flexible, can be changed from time to time, but they must fit in it. Just as you cant have a square peg in a round hole, you cant have a restless or immature Manager for a team of professionals.

Eg:- In the software industry, someone is great with coding/ programming/ bug removal etc. Merely to give him a promotion, he is asked to be a Project leader, when he has no leadership qualities. He would be impatient when a junior/ team member makes a coding mistake and he would be sitting on their head to rectify it. Instead, if we had a person with good leadership qualities, such problems would occur less.

Originally posted by: greatmaratha

Thanks. 😳

I say that the problem lies with those who select Managers. Not everyone is a good Manager and has the potential to extract the best out of his team.

Unfortunately, in todays day and age and competition, people give more value to titles, position, place on the corporate ladder, salary and other considerations. People dont understand that they must find the slot they fit in best and that slot can be flexible, can be changed from time to time, but they must fit in it. Just as you cant have a square peg in a round hole, you cant have a restless or immature Manager for a team of professionals.

Eg:- In the software industry, someone is great with coding/ programming/ bug removal etc. Merely to give him a promotion, he is asked to be a Project leader, when he has no leadership qualities. He would be impatient when a junior/ team member makes a coding mistake and he would be sitting on their head to rectify it. Instead, if we had a person with good leadership qualities, such problems would occur less.

well said GM👏

I feel Managers should Learn how to deal with ambiguity...and They have to be aware of the competition....managers are able to create a climate in which people want to do their best......

I hate to be monitored on daily basis😛

I have been in supervisory positions for quite some occasions in my work history. I can vouch for the fact that micro-management is the worst for gaining employee respect and building morale.

At the same time some jobs which are highly procedural require micromanagement to ensure procedures are being followed. There are also certain people who have a bad attitude and work ethic and need micromanagement.

I agree with Greatmaratha, leaders should not be people who excel at a field but people who have leadership abilities. Poor morale and bad decisions are caused when people without leadership skills are leaders.