[January 6, 2016] Like all my peers, during our time as commanders of military units, we were relentlessly required to provide detailed data on many things and told how to conduct our units in detail. Rarely were we asked how effective our unit might be if we were to deploy into combat. While this has been true for decades, it is a powerful indicator of how the U.S. military is, like any bureaucracy, can be a house of micromanagement cards.
I once asked a senior flag officer, with all our reporting requirements and his top 10 priorities, what would have been the one requirement he could recommend that we remove from that list. The answer was that we had to do them all and they were all important. I laughed (mentally to myself) but the seriousness of the comment was a warning that even senior leaders can be intellectually biased by the desire to please a higher headquarters of their requests. Some impertinently call this “careerism.”
The request for information and over managing commanders drains the time needed for important tasks like ensuring accountability of equipment and personnel, realistic training events, formal educational needs, and physical fitness. More fundamentally however, higher level commanders cannot attain good situational awareness of their subordinate commands through the method of micromanagement.
Why micromanagement is so problematic is that it undermines the trust inherent in good commands. In most well-run organizations, trust is the glue that holds it all together. The military and other successful organizations already have a formal (and informal) decision-making processes that are proven effective. Mistrust, either real or perceived, can have a significant impact.
Micromanagement, especially in the military, interferes with communication, retards creativity, creates inflexible decision-making, and adversely effects honest feedback up the chain of command. There is a risk here that is oft understated. Great care should therefore be taken when managing down in an organization such that it is perceived to be unnecessarily onerous.
On a personal note, I was once called out as a commander (my first command as a Captain) who micromanaged my unit. It was hard to admit that I over managed my unit but I was driving my subordinates crazy. After my First Sergeant (the most senior sergeant in the unit) told me that it was better for me to trust my men (Infantry units are men only), things went better and I wasn’t so overworked. His advice stuck with me throughout my long career and I appreciate it more today than then.
[Don’t forget to “Like” the Leader Maker at our Facebook Page.]
————————-
Note: There is a tremendous amount of information on micromanagement and no lack of good information on it. A couple of good websites on micromanagement are listed here:
- 10 Signs of Micromanagement with Micromanagers: http://www.leadershipthoughts.com/10-signs-of-micromanagement/
- Micromanagement – The Opposite of Leadership: http://ezinearticles.com/?Micromanagement—The-Opposite-of-Leadership&id=860593
- Signs That You are a Micromanager: https://hbr.org/2014/11/signs-that-youre-a-micromanager
- The Pitfalls of Micromanaging: http://www.fastcompany.com/948028/pitfalls-micromanaging