PROJECT REPORT

ON
MICROMANAGEMENT

SUBMITTED TO:

SUBMITTED BY:

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would like to express my special thanks of gratitude to my

teacher as well as our principal who gave me the golden
opportunity

to

do

this

wonderful

project

on

the

topic

Micromanagement, which also helped me in doing a lot of

Research and I came to know about so many new things I am
really thankful to them.

Secondly I would also like to thank my parents and friends who

helped me a lot in finalizing this project within the limited time
frame.

CONTENTS
Introduction
Acknowledgement
Symptoms
Compared with mismanagement
Causes of Micromanagement
Effects of Micromanagement
Pro and Cons of Micromanagement
Tips to avoid Micromanagement
Conclusion
References

INTRODUCTION

In business management, micromanagement is

management

style

whereby a manager closely observes or controls the work of subordinates

or employees. Micromanagement generally has a negative connotation.
Merriam-Webster's
"manage[ment]

Online

especially

Dictionary
with

defines micromanagement

excessive

control

or

attention

as
on

details". Dictionary.com defines micromanagement as "manage[ment] or

control

with

excessive

attention

to

minor

details".The

online

dictionary Encarta defined micromanagement as "atten[tion] to small details

in management: control [of] a person or a situation by paying extreme
attention to small details".
The notion of micromanagement can be extended to any social context
where one person takes a bully approach, in the level of control and
influence over the members of a group. Often, this excessive obsession
with the most minute of details causes a direct management failure in the
ability to focus on the major details.
Micromanaging is a method of management in which an individual closely
observes or controls the work of an employee. In comparison to simply
giving general direction, the micromanager monitors and evaluates every
stage in a process, from beginning to end. This behavior negatively affects
efficiency, creativity, trust, communication, problem-solving, and the
companys ability to reach its goals.
The typical micromanager spends their time directing employees rather
than empowering them. They are often very insecure. They spend more

time with the details of business operations instead of planning the

companys short-term and long-term growth strategies. The fact of the
matter is, time DOES equal money. When the designated leader of an
organization is wasting time (and therefore money) on overseeing projects
instead of focusing on specific growth opportunities, its time to reevaluate
a few things.

SYMPTOMS

Rather than giving general instructions on smaller tasks and then devoting
time to supervising larger concerns, the micromanager monitors and
assesses every step of a business process and avoids delegation of
decisions. Micromanagers are usually irritated when a subordinate makes
decisions without consulting them, even if the decisions are within the
subordinate's level of authority.
Micromanagement also frequently involves requests for unnecessary and
overly detailed reports ("reportomania"). A micromanager tends to require
constant and detailed performance feedback and to focus excessively on
procedural trivia (often in detail greater than they can actually process)
rather than on overall performance, quality and results. This focus on "lowlevel" trivia often delays decisions, clouds overall goals and objectives,
restricts the flow of information between employees, and guides the various
aspects of a project in different and often opposed directions. Many
micromanagers accept such inefficiencies as less important than their
retention of control or of the appearance of control.
It

is

common

for

micromanagers,

exhibit narcissistic tendencies

for strategic reasons,
micromanage

those

and/or

especially

micromanage

to delegate work

to

subordinates'

those

deliberately

subordinates

performance,

who
and

and

then

enabling

the

micromanagers in question to both take credit for positive results and shift
the

blame for

negative

results

to

their

subordinates. [7] These

micromanagers thereby delegate accountability for failure but not

the authority to take alternative actionsthat would have led to success or at
least to the mitigation of that failure.

The most extreme cases of micromanagement constitute a management

pathology

closely

related

to, e.g., workplace

bullying and narcissistic behavior. Micromanagement resembles addiction

in that although most micromanagers are behaviorally dependent on
control over others, both as a lifestyle and as a means of maintaining that
lifestyle, many of them fail to recognize and acknowledge their dependence
even when everyone around them observes it. [1] Some severe cases of
micromanagement arise from other underlying mental-health conditions
such as obsessivecompulsive personality disorder, although not all
allegations of such conditions by subordinates and other "armchair
psychologists" are accurate.
Although micromanagement is often easily recognized by employees,
micromanagers rarely view themselves as such. In a form of denial similar
to that found in addictive behavior, micromanagers will often rebut
allegations of micromanagement by offering a competing characterization
of

their

management

style

as, e.g.,

"structured",

"organized",

"perfectionistic".

COMPARED WITH MISMANAGEMENT

or

Micromanagement can be distinguished from the mere tendency of a

manager to perform duties assigned to a subordinate. When a manager
can perform a worker's job more efficiently than the worker can, the result
is merely suboptimal management: Although the company suffers lost
opportunities because the manager would serve the company even better
by doing her or his own job, the worker's job is still being done well. In
micromanagement, the manager not only tells a subordinate what to do but
dictates that the job be done a certain way regardless of whether that way
is the most effective or efficient one.

Most people who have been in the workforce any length of time have
occasionally

been

exposed

to bosses

who

micromanage.

The

micromanager is the manager who must personally make every decision,

take a lead role in the performance of every significant task and, in extreme
cases, dictate every small step the workers take. To many employees the
micromanager is, in modern parlance, a control freak. The micromanager
hovers over people who are trying to get their work done and rarely, if ever,
seriously considers their ideas and opinions. The only "original" thinking the
micromanager recognizes is his or her own.

SIGNS OF MICROMANAGEMENT
Perhaps the best way to way to minimize the effects of
micromanagement is to identify the signs. Here are a few signs that
I would use to determine if micromanagement is in question:
1. Hard time delegating work
2. Looking at the detail instead of the big picture
3. Monitoring whats least important and not on the results
4. Inserting themselves in the work of others without first
consulting them
5. Immersing themselves in projects / activities assigned to
others
6. Discouraging others from making decisions about how to
complete a task / project
7. Dictating that work is performed in a very particular way versus
focusing on a successful outcome
8. Taking back delegated work before its finished or ready for
review
9. Constantly checking in on progress at unrealistic intervals and
hovering
10. Demanding unrealistic turnaround times without consulting
with the employee on when they think they could get the job
done
11. A demotivated team with low performance

HOW TO MANAGE MICROMANAGERS

Often when youre being micromanaged, you might feel helpless
and held back from growing professionally. Micromanagement can
be a hard battle to fight. There are a few things that you can do to
help ease it.
1. Look at what youre doing (or not doing):
Identify the areas that you need to improve and work on that.
And, if you feel comfortable, ask your manager what could you
be

doing

differently.

Make

sure

you

document

your

improvements so that you can share this with your manager

whenever necessary.
2. Identify patterns:
After a while, you should be able to identify patterns in your
micro manager's behavior. Watch for what causes certain
outbursts related to the work youre responsible for.
3. Understand your managers persona:
Try to see things from their perspective, understand their
motivations and get clear on the business objectives they are
responsible for achieving. Uncovering their motivations and
goals can help you better anticipate their needs and help you
better manage them.

4. Establish KPIs (Key Performance Indicators):

Once youre attuned to you micromanager and understand
both their goals and motivations, work with them to establish
your KPIs. By clearly identifying what youre responsible for
and how youre going to meet your KPIs should help remove
any emotion from their decisions. More importantly this will
help align them with a results focused management style
versus focusing on unimportant details.
5. Constant communication:
Now that you better understand their persona and have
uncovered their behavioral patterns, get ahead of them by
anticipating their needs. In the beginning, while youre trying to
establish trust, send daily status updates about progress on
projects youre working on, highlight where youve had
success and where youre looking for their input. Couple this
with a weekly 1:1, try doing this away from a conference room
or the office so they take their mind away from their behavior
patterns! The hope is this will help you build a positive
relationship

with

your

manager

micromanagement tendencies.

and

reduce

the

CAUSES OF MICROMANAGEMENT
The most frequent motivations for micromanagement, such as detailorientedness, emotional

insecurity,

and

doubts

regarding employees'

competence, are internal and related to the personality of the manager.

Since manager-employee relationships include a difference in power and
often in age, workplace psychologists have used models based
on transference theory to draw analogies between micromanagement
relationships and dysfunctional parent-child relationships, e.g., that both
often feature the frequent imposition of double binds and/or a tendency by
the authority figure to exhibit hypercriticality.[1] However, external factors
such as organizational culture, severe or increased time or performance
pressure, and instability of managerial position (either specific to a
micromanager's position or throughout an organization) may also play a
role.
In many cases of micromanagement, managers select and implement
processes and procedures not for business reasons but rather to enable
themselves to feel useful and valuable and/or create the appearance of
being so. A frequent cause of such micromanagement patterns is a
manager's perception or fear that they lack the competence and creative
capability necessary for their position in the larger corporate structure. In
reaction to this fear, the manager creates a "fiefdom" within which the
manager selects performance standards not on the basis of their relevance
to the corporation's interest but rather on the basis of the ability of the
manager's division to satisfy them.

Such motivations for micromanagement often intensify, at both the

individual-manager and the organization-wide level, during times of
economic hardship. In some cases, managers may have proper goals in
mind but place disproportionate emphasis on the role of their division
and/or on their own personal role in the furtherance of those goals. In
others, managers throughout an organization may engage in behavior that,
while protective of their division's interests or their personal interests,
harms the organization as a whole.
Less frequently, micromanagement is a tactic consciously chosen for the
purpose of eliminating unwanted employees: A micromanager may set
unreachable standards later invoked as grounds for termination of those
employees. These standards may be either specific to certain employees
or generally applicable but selectively enforced only against particular
employees. Alternatively, the micromanager may attempt by this or other
means to create a stressful workplace in which the undesired employees
no longer desire to participate. When such stress is severe or pervasive
enough, its creation may be regarded as constructive discharge(also
known in the United Kingdom as "constructive dismissal" and in the United
States as "constructive termination").

EFFECTS OF MICROMANAGEMENT

Regardless of a micromanager's motive for his or her conduct, its potential

effects include:

Creation

of ex

post resentment

in

both

"vertical"

(manager-

subordinate) and "horizontal" (subordinate-subordinate) relationships

Damage to ex ante trust in both vertical and horizontal relationships

Interference with existing teamwork and inhibition of future teamwork

in both vertical relationships (e.g., via malicious compliance) and
horizontal relationships (e.g., exploitation of moral hazard created by
poorly proportioned effort-reward structures).

Because a pattern of micromanagement suggests to employees that a

manager does not trust their work or judgment, it is a major factor in
triggering employee disengagement, often to the point of promoting a
dysfunctional and hostile work environment in which one or more
managers,

or

even

management

generally,

are

labeled

"control

freaks."[8] Disengaged employees invest time, but not effort or creativity, in

the work in which they are assigned. The effects of this phenomenon are
worse in "assembly line"-type situations where work is passed from one
specialized employee to another, differently specialized employee who
cannot perform his or her own task until the previous employee's is
complete; in such a situation, apathy among "upstream" employees affects
not only their own productivity but also that of their "downstream"
colleagues.
Severe forms of micromanagement can completely eliminate trust, stifle
opportunities for learning and development of interpersonal skills, and even
provoke anti-social behavior. Micromanagers of this severity often rely on

inducing fear in the employees to achieve more control and can severely
affect self-esteem of employees as well as their mental and physical health.
Occasionally, and especially when their micromanagement involves the
suppression of constructive criticismthat could otherwise lead to internal
reform, severe micromanagers affect subordinates' mental and/or physical
health to such an extreme that the subordinates' only way to change their
workplace environment is to change employers or even leave the
workplace despite lacking alternative job prospects (see constructive
discharge, supra).
Finally, the detrimental effects of micromanagement can extend beyond the
"four walls" of a company, especially when the behavior becomes severe
enough to force out skilled employees valuable to competitors: Current
employees may complain about micromanagement in social settings or to
friend-colleagues (e.g., classmates and/or former co-workers) affiliated with
other firms in a field. Outside observers such as consultants, clients,
interviewees, or visitors may notice the behavior and recount it in
conversation with friends and/or colleagues. Most harmfully to the
company, forced-out employees, especially those whose advanced skills
have made them attractive to other companies and gained them immediate
respect, may have few reservations about speaking frankly when
answering questions about why they changed employers; they may even
make affirmative efforts to "badmouth" their former employer in an attempt
at venting or revenge. The resulting damage to the company's reputation
may create or increase insecurity among management, prompting further
micromanagement among managers who use it to cope with insecurity;
such a feedback effect creates and perpetuates a vicious cycle.

PRO AND CONS OF MICROMANAGEMENT

Micromanager is often used as a derogatory term. In the business world,

a micromanager can be seen as judgmental, controlling or even dictatorial.
In these cases, micromanagers either relegate very little work to
subordinates or are overly critical of every detail of a project. Workers in
this situation can start feeling resentful and even loose motivation.
However, micromanaging can also be a beneficial tool in starting a new
business and training new employees. When a business is first opened, it
will be the responsibility of the manager to establish procedures and
protocols for everything from location and office supplies to the hiring
process and project loads. In such cases, the micromanager is likely to be
the business owner.
Pros:
1.

You ensure that everything is being conducted as it should be.

2.

Things are always done your way, and if you have your own
business, this can be a big deal.

3.

Its effective in a situation when a small business owner hires first

employees and needs to train them properly.

4.

Micromanagement might be necessary when working with people

new to the industry.
5. The master is always completely in control
6. Always aware of what is going on with their s-type
7. The s-type will always be dependent upon the D-type

Major cons:
1.

Those who are being micromanaged become resentful, less loyal,

less productive and less willing to give potentially valuable feedback.

Eventually people start to avoid talking to you or try to reduce

conversations to a minimum.
2.

People micromanaged by you may think that you neither trust nor
respect them.

3.

A manager is supposed to delegate responsibilities, and by

micromanaging you fail to do it. If you micromanage people, you simply
dont let them do their job and do it for them instead.

4.

People stop thinking, analyzing and trying to understand what they

are doing and why.
5. S-type doesnt have the ability to grow as a person
6. Once the micromanaging has started, its hard to break the s-type of
this kind of management
7. The s-type has no successes of their own from a completed task

TIPS TO AVOID MICROMANAGEMENT

1. Commit to hiring the right people. It's much easier to create a

culture of accountability with accountable people. At RadioFlyer, the
famous maker of children's wagons, accountability is a core value
central to finding new employees. Prospective job candidates are
screened on whether they proactively seek needed information and
feedback, and whether they strive to accomplish team goals. The
company remains doggedly loyal to this value, going so far to keep
positions open for more than a year if they are unable to find an ideal
match between the candidate, the culture and the position.
Additionally, all 55 of RadioFlyers's employees, hiring managers and
the executive team receive training on the selection process annually.
2. Make people accountable to each other. There is nothing like peer
pressure to drive behavior. At Bridge Worldwide, a Cincinnati-based
digital and relationship marketing agency, employees are given the
chance to give anonymous feedback to various teams in a quarterly
satisfaction survey and an annual benefits opinion survey. Through
these regular audits, employees have the chance to give genuine
feedback on performance from other departments as it relates to their
job. The goal is to create a productive community culture.
3. Clearly and frequently articulate expectations. Entrepreneurs
often find themselves micromanaging their staffs when they don't
adequately communicate their expectations. Employees atHoar
Construction, a construction management firm, are evaluated twice
annually, and receive personal, detailed feedback. New tracking
measures, goals and developmental needs are determined during
these evaluations. The frequency is even greater at FatWallet, the

Illinois-based online discount clearinghouse, where employees and

managers set "Key Performance Indicators" at the beginning of each
quarter to re-evaluate goals, progress and successes/failures.
4. Give employees decision-making power. Your employees are
much more likely to "own" their work when they help create or have a
voice in what they're doing. Bridge Worldwide puts many decisions to
a company vote or suggestion. An example of this was the process of
naming its conference rooms. Employees were asked to nominate a
20th-century icon who embodied the company's values. Based on
these nominations and subsequent votes, the company now has
rooms named after the people who inspire the dynamic culture -including Henson (Jim), Parks (Rosa), Einstein (Albert), DiMaggio
(Joe) and Coltrane (John).
5. Give them an ownership stake. If you want employees to work like
they own the company, then give them a stake in the game. For
example, at Hilcorp, a sense of ownership is instilled through its longterm incentive "Buy-in Compensation Plan." Through this plan, the
Houston-based energy company grants each full-time employee
phantom

participation

interests

in

company

projects

(which

essentially are stocks, except they are for a particular product or

project, not the overall company). Employees also have the
opportunity to buy additional interests using either their money or by
taking advantage of company loans. Employees received cash
distributions totaling more than $130.7 million between 1997 and
2008.

CONCLUSION
You may resort to micromanagement in environments where employees
are easily replaced and little training/spending is necessary to do so.
However, if low employee turnover is important and you are trying to
establish ongoing employee/customer relationships, micromanagement
may stand in the way of achieving these goals.
Micro-managers are bad news for business and bad news for
employees. They dis-empower staff, stifle opportunity and innovation, and
give rise to poor performance.

Because micromanagers rarely recognise their behaviour and the impact it

has on the team it is worthwhile pointing this out to them once you have
gained some trust.
They may be open to working with you. But then again, dont expect too
much sooner or later they will revert to type. Sometimes its you who has
to move on!

Striking the right balance between empowerment and accountability is

not easy. But small business owners who set the right tone will enjoy the
benefits of greater employee initiative and innovation, as well as the
freedom to transition from managing to leading.

REFERENCES
BOOKS & MAGAZINES
My Way or the Highway: The Micromanagement Survival Guide
Managing Up: Obsessive Micromanager

WEBSITES
en.wikipedia.org/.../Micromanagement
www.leadershipthoughts.com
http://work.chron.com/handson-managers-vs-micromanagers3516.html