3 ways “anti-micromanagement” can backfire
- To avoid the dreaded title of “micromanager” a new leader can become the opposite — an “anti-micromanager.”
- An anti-micromanager is someone who is unassertive to the point that they foster confusion, inaction, and ultimately a lack of trust.
- To combat this over-compensation great leaders share their perspective directly, focus on action decisively, and hold themselves and others accountable.
Nobody loves micromanagers, but less discussed (and even less beloved) are the “anti-micromanagers.” Maybe you’ve had one, maybe you’ve been one. To avoid the dreaded title of “micromanager,” a new leader becomes the opposite. But the path to poor leadership is often paved with good intentions.
An anti-micromanager is someone who is unassertive to the point that they foster confusion, inaction, and ultimately a lack of trust. Research suggests some micromanagers feel powerless. Research similarly suggests the same is true of anti-micromanagers. People who feel powerful focus internally on their goals, whereas those who feel powerless often focus externally on being liked. Anti-micromanagers, like the powerless, may put their attention outward rather than inward, and lose the very respect they hope to win.
How do you earn respect while avoid becoming an anti-micromanager? Here are three ways anti-micromanagement backfire, and what you can do to achieve a more balanced leadership style.
#1. Lack of assertive guidance
Anti-micromanagers hesitate to share their perspective with their teams. By providing new clear directives, a leader runs the risk of angering employees who are comfortable with the status quo.
In 1997, Steve Jobs made sweeping changes to Apple that included discontinuing a software platform called OpenDoc. Later that year at Apple’s Worldwide Developers Conference, one disgruntled engineer stood up in front of the crowd and attacked Steve for shutting down OpenDoc. It was an anti-micromanager’s worst nightmare. Steve Jobs paused for a moment. Then he responded that OpenDoc did not fit with Apple’s vision of producing customer-centric value. Apple needed to prioritize their resources elsewhere for the company’s success. Steve’s answer was well-received by the conference audience.
Great leaders see the forest from the trees. The leader’s perspective is what gives them the sanction to lead. According to research out of UCSD, powerful leaders communicate their wider business perspective to ensure employees are not spinning in the weeds. Powerful leaders see the big picture and speak the big picture directly. Employees want this guidance to ensure the team’s actions are meaningful to the organization’s goals. This is one reason why leadership trust goes up when leaders provide clear guidance.
To avoid being an anti-micromanager, share your perspective directly to create an anchor of meaning in the conversation. Be open to the words of others, but always place their words in context to your perspective. Your perspective empowers the team by giving them meaning and direction.
#2. Lack of action
In an effort to avoid rocking the boat, anti-micromanagers make less demands on others. Rather than move projects forward, anti-micromanagers spend countless hours deliberating with their team to ensure everyone is in agreement. The result is less action.
Powerful leaders are action-oriented. In a series of studies conducted at Stanford University, leaders who focused on implementation plans were seen as more powerful than leaders who deliberated. A focus on action is perceived as powerful. Research also suggests leaders are more decisive, coming to a conclusion sooner because of the desire to act.
There is no harm in allowing your team to deliberate about the best course of action, but create boundaries on sharing time. To earn the respect of the room, decide on a plan and move the team forward. Your focus on action empowers the team by motivating them to take action. It is through their action that others access their power.
#3. Lack of accountability
Perhaps the greatest struggle for anti-micromanagers is holding others accountable. Doling out punishment seems like a sure-fire way to earn animosity.
Research shows that powerful leaders naturally take responsibility for their actions. Leaders project this mindset onto others, expecting others to take responsibility too. When a leader holds others accountable, others perceive the leader to be powerful because of the focus on personal responsibility, and thus confer more respect to the leader as a result.
When you hold others accountable, you force them to acknowledge their responsibility, which breaks their illusion of powerlessness and empowers them.
Similarly, holding others accountable benefits the team. Leaders are responsible for the team’s success. When leaders hold others accountable, it strengthens the team’s trust in the leader’s ability to manage the team. Strong leaders don’t hold others accountable for the flimsy desire to feel dominant, they do so because it speaks to their own sense of personal responsibility. When you hold others accountable, you force them to acknowledge their responsibility, which breaks their illusion of powerlessness and empowers them.
Great leaders are respected because they share their perspective directly, they focus on action decisively within that perspective, and they hold themselves and others accountable. Being nice is not the source of respect, these behaviors are.
