Micromanaging...or is it Attention to Detail?

Written by Anthony Demangone

The micro-manager.  Ugh.  It is a label that no manager wants on his or her back.  But managers need some details about what is happening on the ground.

How does one balance the need for details and overall control, with the risk of being a micro-manager? Before you answer that question, consider two articles.

The first comes From the Harvard Business Review: If You're Not Micromanaging, Your Not Leading. Michael Schrage points to the JPMorgan debacle as proof positive of his position.  Here's a snippet from his post.

***

The single most revealing moment in the coverage of JPMorgan's multibillion dollar debacle can be found in this take-your-breath-away passage from The Wall Street Journal:

On April 30, associates who were gathered in a conference room handed Mr. Dimon summaries and analyses of the losses. But there were no details about the trades themselves. "I want to see the positions!" he barked, throwing down the papers, according to attendees. "Now! I want to see everything!"

 When Mr. Dimon saw the numbers, these people say, he couldn't breathe.

Only when he saw the actual trades — the raw data — did Dimon realize the full magnitude of his company's situation. The horrible irony: The very detail-oriented systems (and people) Dimon had put in place had obscured rather than surfaced his bank's horrible hedge. What he'd dismissed as a "tempest in a teapot" less than a month earlier had turned into a multibillion dollar humiliation. If Dimon had seen those positions — naked and unsummarized — back then, could his bank have saved itself and its CEO a lot of money and embarrassment?

Dimon (whom I've met and admire enormously) acknowledges he was too complacent. But this vignette affirms my belief that leaders need to "go to the source" even before they turn to their best people. Seeing the data raw instead of analytically pre-chewed can have enormous impact on executive perceptions. That's not to minimize or marginalize the importance of analysis and interpretation. But when tempests threaten to outgrow their teapots, nothing creates situational awareness faster than seeing with your own eyes what your experts are trying to synthesize and summarize. There's a reason why great chefs visit the farms and markets that source their restaurants: The raw ingredients are critical to success.

***

The second article takes a slightly different stance. Micromanaging is not the Same as Attention to Detail. 

***

There are a many people who confuse micromanagement with attention to detail. Micromanaging has a negative connotation, and for good reason. It is when a manager or leader assigns work, tells capable employees exactly how to do it, monitors them excessively, and often takes over when work is not done exactly as the manager wanted. The result is that employees never learn how to do the job or utilize their skills and creativity. Employees become discouraged and loose interest in the job since they have no sense of ownership in the process or outcomes of their work; the manager does...

Therefore, when attention to detail is mislabeled as micromanaging, one tends to do less of it. This is counterproductive because attention to detail is not the same as micromanaging. Paying attention to detail is what good managers and leaders must do to ensure that work is done properly and the organization's vision is advanced. It involves assigning work, allowing staff to do it their way and making sure it gets done according to agreed standards.

***

Perhaps both authors are driving home the same point.  As a manager, you need to pick the right people, give them the right marching orders, and then let them get busy.  But you must have a monitoring system.  When you catch a whiff that things are veering off course, you must help guide things back on course.  And you might have to roll up your sleeves a bit to do so.

So, let me pose the following questions to you...

1. How does one balance the need for details and overall control, with the risk of being a micromanager? 
2. Where does attention to detail bleed into micromanaging? 

I'd love to hear your thoughts on this one, everyone.  Feel free to leave a comment. 

As always, have a great week, guys. 

Comments

[John Buckley]

Trust and verify. Dimon probably thought he coudl trust those making the trades; now he knows he cannot. Will he replace them with others he can trust or will he get more involved. Probably depends on his personality and whether his comfort with delegation is greater than his need for attention to detail.

[Marci Francisco]

I have to say that I look forward to your posts. They are conversational, insightful and always provide food for thought and discussion. Thank you.

[Mark Arnold]

Micromanaging and paying attention to detail are different than having the pulse of the organization. As a leader, you should always be listening (to your employees, members/customers, finances, etc.). Micormanaging usually means you are looking over their shoulder and don't trust them. That is much different than listening and monitoring.

[Anthony Demangone]

Guys, I couldn't agree more with your feedback. Especially's Marci's! :)

Thanks for reading.

- Anthony

[bob Glenn]

Some managers because of their personality or bend toward detail have a greater degree of comfort with looking deeply into daily activities. I know, I have a significant need to have detail, and I go get it in as raw a form as I can. It keeps those who are my reports away from filtering what I see and understand. You trust your employees. You empower your employees. You verify what your employees are saying is accurate. That is the only way to avoid trouble.