Do you prefer micromanagers or delegators

[Kingu Kurimuzon]

...as bosses/supervisors?

 

[Stigmata]

I prefer delegators. I don't want someone standing over my shoulder and scrutinizing every little thing I do. In my experience, delegators have given me more opportunity to shine. I've advanced farther faster in companies when I've worked under that type of manger as opposed to micromanagers, who I feel are less likely to trust in their underlings' abilities and insights.

I feel the same way. I'd much rather my boss give me a set of tasks to complete and allow me the autonomy to figure out the best and most efficient methods to complete them.

In my experience, micromanagement ultimately ends up stifling the productivity of the entire group, as eventually everyone stops thinking for themselves (not to mention they lose confidence in their own decision making abilitiy) and sits idly by until the next command is given.

 

[Kingu Kurimuzon]

I feel the same way. I'd much rather my boss give me a set of tasks to complete and allow me the autonomy to figure out the best and most efficient methods to complete them.

In my experience, micromanagement ultimately ends up stifling the productivity of the entire group, as eventually everyone stops thinking for themselves (not to mention they lose confidence in their own decision making abilitiy) and sits idly by until the next command is given.

Yeah, I agree. Do you think there's any type of professions or fields where the micromanagement style may actually be better?

 

[Lark]

...as bosses/supervisors? I prefer delegators. I don't want someone standing over my shoulder and scrutinizing every little thing I do. In my experience, delegators have given me more opportunity to shine. I've advanced farther faster in companies when I've worked under that type of manger as opposed to micromanagers, who I feel are less likely to trust in their underlings' abilities and insights. I really miss my old boss, because she told me what needed to be done, then left me to it. My current boss is much more of a micromanager and I get the feeling she doesn't trust me.

I think good management can be a mix of both, depending upon the team and individual in question, at one time I could have used one sort and at another another sort, I know that much but the sorts of work that I have done I suspect are pretty different to what you may be talking about.

On the other hand I do think that there's a toxic mix of both approaches and a toxic exclusive approach, the toxicity is more to do with the individual than the approach they are taking as a manager, some people are capable of a reverse alchemy and can really and truly transform gold into lead. You know the type. It doesnt matter to them whether performance really is good or not so long as it seems good and others believe its good. I think this approach has been popular in the UK for a long time, its part of the reason why you have politicians who celebrate their successes in office while the high street is full of vacant lots and roads and other infrastructure is crumblings to nothing.

 

[Lark]

Yeah, I agree. Do you think there's any type of professions or fields where the micromanagement style may actually be better?

I think it depends on your team, do you have a lot of new starts or experienced personnel, what is the organisational culture and what is its attitude towards new starts or experience per se etc.

I've known organisations that value experience, what I would call "veteran" staff, but I've also known organisations which do not value it at all and would prefer to eradicate experience as it may involve people who are reticent to sacrifice health, life, happiness and proper remuneration because there are real under resourcing issues or an organisation is top heavy etc.

 

[Kingu Kurimuzon]

I think good management can be a mix of both, depending upon the team and individual in question, at one time I could have used one sort and at another another sort, I know that much but the sorts of work that I have done I suspect are pretty different to what you may be talking about.

On the other hand I do think that there's a toxic mix of both approaches and a toxic exclusive approach, the toxicity is more to do with the individual than the approach they are taking as a manager, some people are capable of a reverse alchemy and can really and truly transform gold into lead. You know the type. It doesnt matter to them whether performance really is good or not so long as it seems good and others believe its good. I think this approach has been popular in the UK for a long time, its part of the reason why you have politicians who celebrate their successes in office while the high street is full of vacant lots and roads and other infrastructure is crumblings to nothing.

kinda sounds like Trump and a lot of American politicians, tbh.

 

[Kingu Kurimuzon]

I think it depends on your team, do you have a lot of new starts or experienced personnel, what is the organisational culture and what is its attitude towards new starts or experience per se etc.

I've known organisations that value experience, what I would call "veteran" staff, but I've also known organisations which do not value it at all and would prefer to eradicate experience as it may involve people who are reticent to sacrifice health, life, happiness and proper remuneration because there are real under resourcing issues or an organisation is top heavy etc.

In my department it's mostly experienced people, not many new starts. I mean, my boss is essentially middle management and has to answer to multiple upper management people, which puts a lot of pressure on her, so I can understand why she takes a more hands on approach, I just find it actually hinders more than it helps my performance. Maybe some workers actually prefer being managed that way though.

 

[Sacrophagus]

I give my underlings the ability to assert their personality and have the freedom to make choices that align with our goals.
I don't like them coming back to me for every little thing either. It should be an opportunity for them to grow, develop their skills, and follow the lead they see fit, and I have complete trust in my executives.

 

[Stigmata]

Yeah, I agree. Do you think there's any type of professions or fields where the micromanagement style may actually be better?

My immediate thought to somewhere where micromanagement would be the preferred management style for optimal efficiency might be the manufacturing industry, at the warehouse level where ingenuity and individuality aren't really relevant to the tasks at hand.

Overall, I think it comes down to personalities moreso than anything else; some people actually prefer and thrive under micromanagement. After becoming a manager, I've realized that some people require that constant direction -- While I roll my eyes at some of the questions I get where I think to myself the answer seems so obvious that it agitates me someone wasted the time to come ask me as opposed to just handling it themselves, some people truly don't know how to operate outside of that "worker bee" mentality.

 

[ceecee]

My immediate thought to somewhere where micromanagement would be the preferred management style for optimal efficiency might be the manufacturing industry, at the warehouse level where ingenuity and individuality aren't really relevant to the tasks at hand.

Overall, I think it comes down to personalities moreso than anything else; some people actually prefer and thrive under micromanagement. After becoming a manager, I've realized that some people require that constant direction -- While I roll my eyes at some of the questions I get where I think to myself the answer seems so obvious that it agitates me someone wasted the time to come ask me as opposed to just handling it themselves, some people truly don't know how to operate outside of that "worker bee" mentality.

This is true. Same as some need that office environment/camaraderie/part of a team mentality too - working remotely isn't an attractive option. I manage 7, fairly competent people able to work individually. They know our goals as a group and the tasks that need to be completed to achieve those goals. Beyond that, I'm here to answer questions, give guidance when needed and handle my administrative work and letting them do their job.

I agree that it's personality more than anything but I have met a couple people that really thrive and prefer micromanagement - they don't feel comfortable with or grasp acting pro-actively. I have a feeling at least some of that preference came from being smacked down every time they tried thinking and acting on their own in the workplace. I know people that are terrified to make a decision on their own at work, it's sad but it's also indicative of the world we live in.

 

[Obfuscate]

i want to be left the fuck alone if i know what i am doing...

 

[rav3n]

In the past, I hired and 'rehabbed' talent who were thought to be too independent by others. The word rehabbed is in quotation marks since it only entailed the appreciation of their independence and allowing them to reach a clearly defined end goal with all the tools necessary to accomplish. Give me one independent over two line staff, since you can rely on the independent's laziness to work smart.

Vive l'indépendance!

 

[Tomb1]

In the past, I hired and 'rehabbed' talent who were thought to be too independent by others. The word rehabbed is in quotation marks since it only entailed the appreciation of their independence and allowing them to reach a clearly defined end goal with all the tools necessary to accomplish. Give me one independent over two line staff, since you can rely on the independent's laziness to work smart.

Vive l'indépendance!

The OP is asking members whether they prefer micromanagers or delegators for a boss, not if they themselves prefer to micromanage or delegate others. Remember to read what has actually been written before rushing in with an opinion.

 

[Cellmold]

I prefer micromanaging when it's a task I have no experience in.

Particularly at my current job (veterinary practice nurse) as the theory you learn at college is little preparation for the actual job itself & you can't exactly chance it with your own judgement because of the severity of the consequences. However after a certain point I desire autonomy so I can get on with the jobs I know.

 

[ThoughtBubbles]

I don't think that anyone who prefers a micromanager will admit to it under those terms...

I think lots of people are in denial about being followers, being passive, or liking a lack of control in their work lol. However, I think most people prefer being followers and there's nothing inherently wrong with that being your natural inclination at work.

 

[Lark]

I prefer micromanaging when it's a task I have no experience in.

Particularly at my current job (veterinary practice nurse) as the theory you learn at college is little preparation for the actual job itself & you can't exactly chance it with your own judgement because of the severity of the consequences. However after a certain point I desire autonomy so I can get on with the jobs I know.

That's exactly what I think of as better management (would not qualify it as good management yet) and in management literature that I've read its usually referred to as a "dynamic" management style as opposed to "proactive" (does the job for you) or "laissez faire" (spelling, does not intervene).

 

[rav3n]

The OP is asking members whether they prefer micromanagers or delegators for a boss, not if they themselves prefer to micromanage or delegate others. Remember to read what has actually been written before rushing in with an opinion.

It doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure out that my preference is for delegators.

 

[Kingu Kurimuzon]

I don't think that anyone who prefers a micromanager will admit to it under those terms...

I think lots of people are in denial about being followers, being passive, or liking a lack of control in their work lol. However, I think most people prefer being followers and there's nothing inherently wrong with that being your natural inclination at work.

I just admitted the terms and reasons for which I prefer one style over another. There was no intention to portray those who prefer the other style in a negative manner

 

[Tellenbach]

You're missing the 3rd type of manager: the oblivious, clueless guy who doesn't bother to check on the employees to make sure they're working and doing their tasks correctly. This type is equally as bad as the micromanager because he lets your co-workers get away with wasting time, surfing on the net, talking on the phone, and goofing off.

The ideal manager is someone who knows his staff and knows what they can handle and delegates when needed and closely watches them when needed.

 

[Lark]

You're missing the 3rd type of manager: the oblivious, clueless guy who doesn't bother to check on the employees to make sure they're working and doing their tasks correctly. This type is equally as bad as the micromanager because he lets your co-workers get away with wasting time, surfing on the net, talking on the phone, and goofing off.

The ideal manager is someone who knows his staff and knows what they can handle and delegates when needed and closely watches them when needed.

Dynamic manager type.

That's the opposite of the type of management libertarianism usually wants to promote.