Learn how you can tell from the analysis results whether the candidate has a high tendency to micromanage, and why you shouldn’t always write off a candidate with this tendency.
Micromanagement can come in many forms, and there are many different combinations of personal characteristics that can lead to a candidate having a high tendency to micromanage. To boil it down to its two main character groups:
- High Accountability
- Low Constructive attitude
When we examine the relationship between employee and manager, one of the things most employees highlight as being problematic is that the manager tends to micromanage them. Employees may feel that they do not have the freedom to think for themselves or take initiative, while at the same time, micromanagement can be an extremely time-consuming management style for the manager.
Ultimately, this can lead to reduced motivation in employees who do not feel that they are developing. This can result in lower productivity.
If micromanagement gets out of hand, the bottom line will suffer. The simplistic conclusion might therefore be that managers with a tendency to micromanage should be avoided at all costs. But that would be the wrong decision.
Indeed, it is hard to imagine a good manager who, in the wrong circumstances, would not find themselves micromanaging employees. The much-criticised style of micromanagement is driven by the very attributes that make a good manager – commitment, critical thinking and accountability.
In other words, if you want a manager who is guaranteed not to micromanage, you need to find a manager who is uncommitted, uncritical and does not take responsibility.
We do not recommend going down this route, as it is likely to have even greater negative consequences for the workplace.
Instead, we recommend finding a manager who is dedicated, able to think critically and who takes responsibility – while also gaining the deepest possible understanding of the manager’s personality. That is, understand what framework the manager needs in order not to fall into the micromanagement trap. To understand what can trigger the micromanagement gene, one must find the causes in the individual manager.
Two types of managers who micromanage for different reasons
Everyone is different, and of course so are managers. We will present two examples of types of managers who both tend to micromanage, but for very different reasons.
We have chosen to call them the controlling manager and the insecure overachiever.
The controlling manager’s commitment is driven by a desire for power, results and personal ambition. This manager is characterised by low trust in employees and dominant behaviour. This type of manager will have the following characteristics:
- Low Constructive attitude – Needs to get to know people and size them up before he/she dares to trust them, withdraws if others betray trust.
- High Dominance – The tendency to be visible and take control.
- High Strength of will – The degree to which one seeks to influence others and maintain one’s own views, actions and/or goals.
- High Communication volume – How much the person talks.
It is likely we will see fewer controlling managers in the future. This type of manager tends to fall into the micromanagement trap when employees think for themselves and challenge the manager’s decisions – and we’re only likely to see more of that in the future. The controlling manager thrives best in a hierarchical workplace where it is important that everyone follows the manager’s direction. Examples of such workplaces include the military, a Michelin-starred kitchen or similar.
The insecure overachiever’s commitment is driven by a mix of insecurity, high expectations of themselves and a strong desire to meet the expectations of others. This type of manager is characterised by:
- High Accountability – Acknowledges own responsibility and opportunity to influence events, whether positively or negatively.
- Highly Detail-oriented – The tendency to focus on individual parts to ensure quality.
- Low score for Evaluating positively – Critical and sceptical, quick to find fault, demands high standards.
- Low Emotional processing – Reflective, concerned, speculative.
The insecure overachiever is a type of manager that is seen most often among the younger generations, and we expect to see even more managers of this type in the future. So how do you rein in their tendency to micromanage?
It is often triggered by insecurity, a huge sense of responsibility and a fear of making mistakes. When dealing with this type of manager, it is important to make the person aware of these reaction patterns. A perfectionist manager will typically assume that their interference is necessary for success, when in fact their interference sometimes has the opposite effect. This can lead to failure because it increases inefficiency and creates frustration among employees who feel that they are not being given the chance to show what they can do. And you can explain that to the insecure overachiever who, unlike the dominant manager, will be very receptive to input.
