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

71–80 of 110 posts

Re: Way to Deal with a Micromanaging Boss

#71

Post by ljm »

majormajor wrote: post #10
ljm wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The truth is probably that I should have gotten into more serious talks with those employees instead. Did you take the micromanaging approach because you didn't open a channel for feedback between you and the team? Micromanagement is one thing: a lack of trust. You micromanage because you don't trust, or maybe they don't trust either. So, what do you do to build up trust? You talk. Note that this is different to ac…

> So, what do you do to build up trust? You talk. What do you do when talking leads to them saying "I understand, next time I'll either get it done faster, or let you know when I realize it's gonna slip" but then what actually happens is that it slips without them giving you any updates again after all? Repeatedly? Talking doesn't build trust when the actions don't match the talk.

I worded this badly, but this is the accountability piece.

You say that you want X. X has to be reasonably achievable. You don't tell them how to do X, though.

That introduces another set of problems. You have to do X within Y.

Suddenly you know more of Y than X. So then you turn towards Z and you have to do XY within Z, but Y is more important than X.

Re: Way to Deal with a Micromanaging Boss

#72

Post by treebog »

majormajor wrote: post #10
ljm wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The truth is probably that I should have gotten into more serious talks with those employees instead. Did you take the micromanaging approach because you didn't open a channel for feedback between you and the team? Micromanagement is one thing: a lack of trust. You micromanage because you don't trust, or maybe they don't trust either. So, what do you do to build up trust? You talk. Note that this is different to ac…

> So, what do you do to build up trust? You talk. What do you do when talking leads to them saying "I understand, next time I'll either get it done faster, or let you know when I realize it's gonna slip" but then what actually happens is that it slips without them giving you any updates again after all? Repeatedly? Talking doesn't build trust when the actions don't match the talk.

It could be that the IC is just very bad at estimating schedules, so much so that they don’t realize they are falling behind. If that’s the case, some training on software estimation and how to set good milestones could pay large dividends.

Another possibility is that the environment is one in which it’s not okay to admit that schedules are slipping, despite the manager’s insistence to the contrary.

There are many more possibilities of course. Does the employee have any insights into why they failed to take the action they promised?

Re: Way to Deal with a Micromanaging Boss

#73

Post by hinkley »

marcinzm wrote: post #27
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. I disagree. It's like parents who spend all their time on the problem child, and then the children who are doing well become bitter and resentful. You're neglecting the rest of the team for one individual, who they all probably see is problematic, which is not a good way to run a team.

As a peer and/or lead I've found a process that should help with this. Unfortunately you rarely get a boss who will fire someone (layoffs are another story) and so the most you can do is slowly take away their responsibilities and give them to someone else. Effectively, ghosting them.

Essentially you build tools that help avoid some of the problems you're seeing, and slowly ratchet up from beta test to mandatory as the tool becomes more reliable. At the end if the problem person refuses to use the tool, then you have a clear HR problem.

The people who make mistakes aren't your enemy. The people who make mistakes and insist they don't need help are the enemy.

Re: Way to Deal with a Micromanaging Boss

#74

Post by petee »

dcolkitt wrote: post #34
petee wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I mostly agree with you. But there are many many reasons why these constraints may still apply, at least in the short term. Ideally you want everyone to be competent enough at their role to need minimal management. But the reality is that often times you'll find yourself in a situation where that's not true. And it's pretty rare when you just have the freedom to bring everything to a halt to start from scratch.

This is true, I didn't mean to suggest there weren't good exceptions. Although instead of starting from scratch sometimes reassigning crew will uncover unknown strengths and weaknesses.

Personal example of this, an old foreman I knew on a job, had a boss who didn't understand that people had strengths, so as an example he would routinely swap people into tasks that emphasized their weakness to prove it.

Additionally, this allowed people who didnt do X job because they didn't have the confidence or skill, to actually get a little extra experience as well

Re: Way to Deal with a Micromanaging Boss

#75

Post by watwut »

barbazoo wrote: post #11
logicslave wrote: post #6

The way I deal with it is by leaving the team immediately. My life is too short to put up with being treated like a slave. I am too good at programming.

> My life is too short to put up with being treated like a slave. > logicslave 2 minutes ago That made me chuckle. On a serious note though, why not start by talking about it first? Why not say what you're experiencing, how it makes you feel, and see how your manager responds? Unless you work in total isolation, which few of us do, we have to get along with other people. And talking about things usually is the way to…

Your chances to completely change your managers personality and habits are nearly zero. It is hard enough to change people under you or peers.

You can change small thing via communication and fix small issues. Something like whole management style, no not really.

Re: Way to Deal with a Micromanaging Boss

#76

Post by rammy1234 »

Only way to look at management is that you are there to support. You are there to provide a best possible environment where an employee can express themselves. Employee only needs one other thing from management - "What is the expectation". If expectations are set right and communicated well and reiterated frequently, you are set up for success.

Re: Way to Deal with a Micromanaging Boss

#77

Post by plausibledeny »

It's hard to generalize, sometimes the issue is the boss, sometimes it's the employee and often it's both.

Managers need to understand that the goal is not and should not be 'employee performed this task exactly how I would have'. Especially if the differences aren't material. But so I often I see managers kill initiative by focusing on stylistic or minor issues. If you want it done exactly your way, do it yourself or hire a clone.

Re: Way to Deal with a Micromanaging Boss

#78

Post by watwut »

barbazoo wrote: post #56
moshmosh wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That may work sometimes, but most of the time you're going to run into one of two problems, and possibly both at the same time: 1) Micromanaging is often co-morbid with other bad-boss habits. These may make attempts at "managing" your boss toward improvement unrealistic and even highly ill-advised. 2) If your boss is micromanaging you, this is a strong signal that their opinion of you is already somewhere around the…

This is all assuming all kinds of things that may or may not be true. Until you can read people's minds, validate your assumptions by communicating with people. The same argument you made can be made the other way. Maybe it's just a matter of reporting what you did, updating tickets. Maybe your manager thinks you like the attention. Maybe maybe maybe. Just talk to each other!

Managers who listen and react to what they hear don't become micromanagers. If the issue is just a matter of you not updating jira, then the chance it will come across as micromanagement is quite small.

Re: Way to Deal with a Micromanaging Boss

#79

Post by logicslave »

lazide wrote: post #58
jbverschoor wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

FYI - The official line for several FAANG’s is that the week/day level of micromanagement done as part of typical performance management for underperformers is referred to as investment. And it kinda is - about 25% of the people I’ve had to do it for did well (4 if I remember correctly). Another 25% needed a clear ‘you need to improve or you’re out’ message that merely saying it to them did not provide. They needed t…

Amazon manager spotted

Re: Way to Deal with a Micromanaging Boss

#80

Post by j4yav »

meowfly wrote: post #36
the_arun wrote: post #7

I think "Trust" is the primary reason for Micromanaging. If a person doesn't trust their subordinates they try to micromanage. This just doesn't happen at work, at home as well (eg. between parents & kids).

If someone doesn't "trust" their team, I think they should also look inward at their own expectations. I've definitely seen micromanagers who should be able to trust their team but due to their own sense of pride/narcissism/whatever you want to call it, they believe they need to get personally involved. This is a recurring joke in design, where a CEO hires a designer only to throw away all their feedback and build so…

Strongly agree here. Micromanaging is a sign of a manager in over their head more than an environmental problem. It manifests as a lack of trust, but you don’t really fix the underlying cause by addressing only the lack of trust.
Post reply on HN