Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Way to Deal with a Micromanaging Boss

misc-stuff.terraaeon.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 110 posts

Re: Way to Deal with a Micromanaging Boss

#61

Post by ToJans »

I've been on both sides, both as a "servant leader" and as a "servant".

Context matters. The only time I micro-managed a team myself, was when someone at the top was instigating a blame culture. I did explain all the goals in detail to the people, and explained why it mattered that we delivered exactly according to the specs, even though it wasn't really functional. Sales always blamed IT for failing to deliver according to specs, while the sales intake was actually fubarred, resulting in way too low quotes and everyone blaming IT, resulting in a negative downfall.

I have been micro-managed about 3 years ago for about 3 months, but this was when I was consulting in a highly political organisation with very complex regulation (EU airspace), so it was part of my initial training. Once trust was there I spent most of my time engaging with all the counterparts according to the explicit and implicit protocol and rules ("continuous improvement manager" for the curious, but what's in a name...)

What I have done quite a few times, is not micro-managing, but micro-coaching: sitting next to a person every waking hour available for help, assistance and spotting potential frustrations. This is usually part of a bigger, risky change trajectory where I decide to start with the one person "impossible to convert"; in a lot of cases these people actually became some of the ambassadors of the whole project, and this is a big win for such projects...

Edit: some more details regarding the "being micro-managed" part.

Re: Way to Deal with a Micromanaging Boss

#62

Post by hinkley »

petee wrote: post #29
shoto_io wrote: post #2

Ok, I am going to be brutally honest here. Some may not like it. Micromanaging is complicated. When I was in a leadership position I was the happiest boss when I could let people just do their thing and come back with great results and we'd be all happy. And that's how I loved working with my bosses before as well. But then again, I had some employees I had to micromanage. I really, really abhorred it. But there was…

I read a good book about management recently that pretty much defined the need for micromanagement as either lack of training, and/or lack of clear expectations and appropriate resolution when those expectations are broken. The sum of it is an employee that knows the right way, and is given the freedom to do that will make the correct choices, if they fail occasionally that's ok. If they can't be trained, or refused…

Making all of the decisions is just another variant on the "don't accept responsibility for things you have no control over". Your boss is taking the power to make the decision. Your boss is not taking responsibility for cleaning up the mess if that decision turns out to be just as stupid as all of the developers predicted.

Re: Way to Deal with a Micromanaging Boss

#63

Post by zug_zug »

extr wrote: post #51

This hits home. I recently quit a job (~2 months ago) that was exactly the situation described. I had never encountered micromanagement to that degree before and was initially, naively, willing to accept my boss's criticism as "learnings" for myself. He was of course totally unavailable until ~6PM, after which he would dive into the weeds on my work product for the day. "This chart's axis aren't clear enough". "Line…

I have a long and healthy career in tech, including some companies you would have heard of. At one point in the last 6 years I briefly worked for a manager just as bad as what you describe. I quit within 3 months, and I'm so glad I did.

I've never had anything quite like it before or since. These stories are worth remembering and sharing, had I been less wordly at the time I might have suffered a psychologically unhleathy work dynamic for longer, thinking it was my problem to fix.

-----

Edit: Just as one example, one random Tuesday that boss called me up from California (he was remote, I wasn't) and, out of the blue, asked "How can I justify your salary?" No real company is going to ask you a mind-screw question like that once they hire you. I didn't really need the job and basically explained to him, "I have no idea if you need my specific skills at this company, that's ultimately your job to figure out. If you don't I'm sure I'll find somewhere else that does need them. And you must realize that if you call me up and say something like this, you're basically going to make me wonder if I need a new job for a whole day."

Maybe the moral of this story is to invest a lot of money early, so you have that escape-hatch in case things go south.

Re: Way to Deal with a Micromanaging Boss

#64

Post by dogman144 »

This article, written by a career engineer/non-manager it should be noted, attributes pretty incorrect intent to the micromanagers the author has apparently worked for.

It’s pretty easy to solve this, and it can be summarized as “manage upwards.”

Every micromanager does it out of a lack of trust. Not so much not trusting the specific employee, but more not trusting the specific process that generate the information and results for the process the micromanager is “managing.” They also might suck at delegation, and they also might (usually are) getting info request after info request from their bosses.

It all flows down to you as a line worker.

Either way, every micromanager I’ve worked with, and I’ve worked with some really intense ones, have been solved:

0) rule out that you actually know how to do your job, as maybe your manager is really hand holding you for a reason, and that reason is you’re an unorganized mess. That aside…

1) by tactically empathizing with the manager’s plight. You don’t have to know why they’re asking for stuff, but it almost always derived from the above situations.

2) understand that the root of it, no matter the cause, is need for information.

3) figure out the timing and cause of the waves information requests, and *just start preempting them on a schedule your manager can anticipate and start to rely on*

Provide that manager every gosh darn piece of info you know they’ll ask for, and do it on a scheduled basis. This will work. It builds the manager’s trust in the process generating the results he has to manager into existence. It implicitly runs on the manager’s “needs” schedule, as you learn it and preempt it. The manager will then start looking for those 10am, 4pm updates instead of to you, as you provide them like clockwork and they’re well done and detailed.

I promise this works. It’s hard to understand why if you’ve never been in a manager role. Weak managers deal with the pressures of it by micromanaging.

Re: Way to Deal with a Micromanaging Boss

#65

Post by vikiomega9 »

shoto_io wrote: post #2

Ok, I am going to be brutally honest here. Some may not like it. Micromanaging is complicated. When I was in a leadership position I was the happiest boss when I could let people just do their thing and come back with great results and we'd be all happy. And that's how I loved working with my bosses before as well. But then again, I had some employees I had to micromanage. I really, really abhorred it. But there was…

> As an employee, try to be as a reflective person as you ask your boss to be one. Maybe your work is the reason for him/her to be micromanaging

This is great advice about being reflective, however most humans don't like such conversations (for example like most friend groups). Do you have advice on how to approach such conversations?

Re: Way to Deal with a Micromanaging Boss

#66

Post by sgt101 »

jbverschoor wrote: post #35
shoto_io wrote: post #2

Ok, I am going to be brutally honest here. Some may not like it. Micromanaging is complicated. When I was in a leadership position I was the happiest boss when I could let people just do their thing and come back with great results and we'd be all happy. And that's how I loved working with my bosses before as well. But then again, I had some employees I had to micromanage. I really, really abhorred it. But there was…

> But before you fire people, you have to invest to be absolutely sure you're doing the right thing. It's the right thing to fire them. For you and for them. Wrong match, end of story. Could be they lack experience or something else, but it might just as well be you lacking clear goals etc. Either way, wrong match, end of story.

True iff there are people to hire who are better, cost of hire is low && latency of hire is low.

In many situations none of those things hold. In some of these situations investing in the failing team is far better than checking them out and then repeating the disaster.

And, remember others are watching. If you have a rep as an axeman a lot of people won't work for you - no ifs, no buts, no amount of comp will make a difference. You can end up with the B team - a B team who won't look you in the eye and produces 70 pages of evidence at every evaluation.

Good luck with your management career!

Re: Way to Deal with a Micromanaging Boss

#67

Post by lazide »

garciasn wrote: post #52
throwaway8581 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some people are not self-driven but can still do good work if subjected to stronger authority. It's ultimately a business decision as to whether it's worth providing that kind of authority. But note that to the extent that someone suffers from ADHD and just needs a stronger hand from their manager as an accommodation in order to be productive, you might be legally required to give it to them.

I believe what you're saying amounts of effective leadership. I feel there's a very LARGE and DISTINCT difference between effective management and micromanagement. The article's points show that when dealing with a micromanager, you're dealing with a narcissist. Nothing the employee does is right; the manager's path forward is likely not even possible; and, most importantly, only the manager feels they themselves can…

If you’re having to go through item by item to give direct support, and explicit feedback for literally everything the person is doing - I’d consider that micromanagement if done to me, no matter who was doing it or why.

I think most people would consider that the case. There is also the trope of the ‘micromanager’ who is the insecure ‘I asked 5 minutes ago, why isn’t it done exactly right already’ type. They might be narcissists, but I’ve seen plenty who weren’t - insecurity always plays a huge part, and seems correlated with workaholism too. They micromanage everyone.

It’s entirely possible to be micromanaged by someone due to something you’re doing, and by someone who isn’t a micromanager or prone to micromanaging. They’ll hate it, but they have reasons why specifically they are doing it with you that may suck to hear, but probably have some grounding in reality. I’ve been on both sides of this and it sucks on both sides.

It’s also possible to work for someone that micromanages everyone because that’s who they are.

Re: Way to Deal with a Micromanaging Boss

#68

Post by dasil003 »

A lot of comments here about trust being the key to software dev management, with the implication being that managers should trust their subordinates. I agree with that, but also it needs to go the other way: as a subordinate you need to trust your manager; this isn't just for ICs, it goes all the way up the management chain. To be clear, this is not about your manager looking out for your interests per se—that should be table stakes since you have a mutual interest in your team's success—but rather you need to know that your manager is competent. If you haven't had much experience, this is incredibly difficult to suss out since you really don't know what's involved in management, however they should be able to engage any question you have about why they are asking things be done a certain way. If they aren't able to listen and address your concerns in a meaningful way, that's a red flag. Also, if what they are saying is not aligned with what you hear from higher-level leadership that is also a red flag.

The other thing to call out here is that the word "micromanaging" is already framing the conversation around the worst connotations of high-touch management. But the reality is that sometimes people need high-touch management at certain times in order to be successful. In an ideal team, the manager understands each subordinate well enough to give them exactly the right guardrails that they have the autonomy and decision-making power commensurate with their skill, while also leaving room for mistakes and growth. For junior to mid-level this means assigning tasks and projects, for senior to staff level this means taking more input from them and aligning with organizational priorities. At any level it's possible for an IC to feel micromanaged, which is why two-way trust and open communication are so critical.

Re: Way to Deal with a Micromanaging Boss

#69

Post by treeman79 »

Mc91 wrote: post #40
shoto_io wrote: post #2

Ok, I am going to be brutally honest here. Some may not like it. Micromanaging is complicated. When I was in a leadership position I was the happiest boss when I could let people just do their thing and come back with great results and we'd be all happy. And that's how I loved working with my bosses before as well. But then again, I had some employees I had to micromanage. I really, really abhorred it. But there was…

On the other hand, I have been in positions where I and the team delivered spectacular results year after year, and I am not micro-managed, and then my excellent boss leaves for greener pastures, and suddenly a new much worse boss comes in and begins micromanaging me. Fellow workers, the boss and management is not looking out for your interest, the default is they're looking out for their interest. Your best hope is…

Have walked into roles where managers were used to dealing with nothing but jr developers.

Some have backed off when they realized I know what I’m doing. We have a good working relationship.

Others double down hard, and take it as personal insult that I’m not going to be micromanaged. These cases end badly.

Others give try to micromanage, I let them know I’m not going to follow their rules. They don’t actually care what I do. But they keep trying. Basically pretending they are managing me. These situations are depressing and sad.

To contrast.

Then there are the ones that just point a general direction and encourage good team dynamics. I love these ones

Re: Way to Deal with a Micromanaging Boss

#70

Post by plausibledeny »

JustSomeNobody wrote: post #20
shoto_io wrote: post #2

Ok, I am going to be brutally honest here. Some may not like it. Micromanaging is complicated. When I was in a leadership position I was the happiest boss when I could let people just do their thing and come back with great results and we'd be all happy. And that's how I loved working with my bosses before as well. But then again, I had some employees I had to micromanage. I really, really abhorred it. But there was…

> The truth is probably that I should have gotten into more serious talks with those employees instead. Absolutely. A manager should regularly have conversations with everyone on their team. During reviews, absolutely nobody should be surprised by their review. If a manager has to fire someone, that person should not be surprised by this. Constant communication is not micromanagement, it is an absolute requirement of…

I agree 100%, reviews should never be a surprise. But it's amazing how people have selection attention. I've told people that they were headed for a below average rating and found them to be surprised when they received that. It's tricky when you have an employee with performance issues, because you want to focus on the parts they're doing right but at the same time you need to give them honest feedback and it can get confusing. "But you said I was doing better."
Post reply on HN