If you think you might be working for a micromanager, but you aren't sure, count yourself lucky, because when your boss is a micromanager, there's absolutely no doubt. Um, wait, there is some doubt — your boss might be a nanomanager. Nanomanagers are about a thousand times worse. They do most of what micromanagers do, but they do it more often, and way better. Here's a little catalog of what it takes to be a nanomanager.
- Has open door policy, but the door in question is yours.
- For any task, specifies precisely how and by-when.
- When you can't do the how or you miss the by-when for a task, determines the how and the by-when of determining the new how and the new by-when.
- Does the things you're supposed to do, but still insists that you do them too.
- Is too busy doing your job to pay any attention to own job.
- Can't tolerate incompetent subordinates.
- Can't tolerate competent subordinates.
- Demands the impossible.
- Is clueless about difference between what's possible and what's not.
- Doesn't understand — and therefore rejects — all explanations of why the impossible is impossible.
- Blames subordinates for all failures.
- Claims responsibility for all successes.
- Sees no need to recognize contributions of subordinates, since there aren't any.
- Makes Captain Queeg and Captain Bligh look like management geniuses.
- Has fingers in everything, but has no idea where anything stands.
- Demands next status report before previous status report is completed.
- Claims all assignments are clear and unambiguous.
- Won't supply clear answers to questions about ambiguous assignments.
- Corrects the way you ask clarifying questions about ambiguous assignments.
- Has said, "I don't like surprises," but gets obvious thrills from surprising subordinates.
- Nanomanagers are like
micromanagers, but about
1000 times worseIs isolated from peers, with possible exception of other nanomanagers.
- Changes directions frequently, but doesn't necessarily inform subordinates.
- When contradicted by Reality, or by own boss, claims never to have said or believed what was contradicted.
- Can't always resist the urge to tell subordinates how to use the phone system.
- Doesn't actually know how to use the phone system.
- Sits in on meetings chaired by subordinates, saying, "Pretend I'm not here," then hijacks the meeting.
- Insists on signing off on all decisions of subordinates, and regularly rejects some.
- Countermands decisions of subordinates, then makes same decisions a few days later.
- Can't always coherently explain what was wrong with rejected decisions.
- Never takes vacation.
- Does get sick from time to time, but comes to work anyway, saying, "I'm needed."
- Takes sick days only for major surgery, and then only while still anesthetized.
- Periodically tries to build rapport with subordinates, by stopping by for friendly, relaxed chats, but only when hard deadline is imminent.
- Strenuously denies micromanaging anyone, ever.
Is every other day a tense, anxious, angry misery as you watch people around you, who couldn't even think their way through a game of Jacks, win at workplace politics and steal the credit and glory for just about everyone's best work including yours? Read 303 Secrets of Workplace Politics, filled with tips and techniques for succeeding in workplace politics. More info
For a survey of tactics for managing pressure, take a look at the series that begins with "Managing Pressure: Communications and Expectations," Point Lookout for December 13, 2006.
For more about micromanagement, see "When Your Boss Is a Micromanager," Point Lookout for December 5, 2001; "There Are No Micromanagers," Point Lookout for January 7, 2004; "Are You Micromanaging Yourself?," Point Lookout for November 24, 2004; "Reverse Micromanagement," Point Lookout for July 18, 2007; and "Lateral Micromanagement," Point Lookout for September 10, 2008.
Your comments are welcomeWould you like to see your comments posted here? rbrenogMhuqCxAnbfLvzbner@ChacigAthhhYwzZDgxshoCanyon.comSend me your comments by email, or by Web form.
About Point Lookout
Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and found it useful, and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.
This article in its entirety was written by a human being. No machine intelligence was involved in any way.
Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout, as an individual or as an organization.
Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in, anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.
More articles on Workplace Politics:
- When Leaders Fight
- Organizations often pretend that feuds between leaders do not exist. But when the two most powerful
people in your organization go head-to-head, everyone in the organization suffers. How can you survive
a feud between people above you in the org chart?
- I've Got Your Number, Pal
- Recent research has uncovered a human tendency — possibly universal — to believe that we
know others better than others know them, and that we know ourselves better than others know themselves.
These beliefs, rarely acknowledged and often wrong, are at the root of many a toxic conflict of long standing.
- Management Debt: I
- Management debt, like technical debt, arises when we choose paths — usually the lowest-cost paths
— that lead to recurring costs that are typically higher than alternatives. Why do we take on
management debt? How can we pay it down?
- Getting Into the Conversation
- In well-facilitated meetings, facilitators work hard to ensure that all participants have opportunities
to contribute. The story is rather different for many meetings, where getting into the conversation
can be challenging for some.
- Gratuitous Complexity as a Type III Error
- Some of the technological assets we build — whether hardware, software, or procedures —
are gratuitously complex. That's an error, but an error of a special kind: it can be the correct solution
to the wrong problem.
Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout
- Coming December 13: Contrary Indicators of Psychological Safety: I
- To take the risks that learning and practicing new ways require, we all need a sense that trial-and-error approaches are safe. Organizations seeking to improve processes would do well to begin by assessing their level of psychological safety. Available here and by RSS on December 13.
- And on December 20: Contrary Indicators of Psychological Safety: II
- When we begin using new tools or processes, we make mistakes. Practice is the cure, but practice can be scary if the grace period for early mistakes is too short. For teams adopting new methods, psychological safety is a fundamental component of success. Available here and by RSS on December 20.
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenogMhuqCxAnbfLvzbner@ChacigAthhhYwzZDgxshoCanyon.com or (650) 787-6475, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.
Get the ebook!
Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:
- Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, )
- Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, )
- Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, )
- Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, )
- Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, )
- Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, )
Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline? Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500-1000 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info
Beware any resource that speaks of "winning" at workplace politics or "defeating" it. You can benefit or not, but there is no score-keeping, and it isn't a game.