Don’t Label All Politicians ‘Control Freak

When governments resort to micromanaging, could it tantamount to political leverage. Often it becomes a habit very hard to break.

It is what some management experts term as keeping tabs on your team, which lowers self-esteem and is regressive to employees’ creativity and professional growth. But politicians, if not put on check, can overdo it and misuse micromanaging leverage for their personal gains.

In other words, the concern is that micromanaging often than not denies subordinates the space they need to succeed and learn. It is now eminent that following reports countrywide on ghost workers, it has become inevitable for the ministers and other presidential appointees to micromanage their subordinates.

Keeping your hands off from your subordinates is what makes a leader stand out from the crowd, especially when there is no urgency to do so. However, when the situation is fully charged with claims on ghost workers that, day-in-day-out, keep emerging with new figures micromanaging could be justified temporarily.

How should you, as a leader, set your priorities without being labelled as a ‘control freak’ under such circumstances? Perhaps, if we have a chance to talk to those who have been casualties of philosophy of squeezing boils, we might get more impression of why leaders have decided that better be labelled a ‘control freak’ or excessive meddler, than thinking about stepping back and let things take their own course, lest something erupts out of your radar and make you pay a big price. But the flip of it is that some leaders are obsessed with micromanaging habit, which has nothing to do with the philosophy of squeezing boils.

These are the bosses who worship on details, think nothing should go without their notice, hence cc’ed on emails and always not satisfied with his or her subordinates. So this is a typical micromanager per se.

Some are equal of private interest masquerading as public good. They want to be on top of everything so as to safeguard their private interests. It sounds disgusting! Borrowing a leaf from Muriel Maignan Wilkins, coauthor of Own the Room and managing partner of Paravis Partners, an executive coaching and leadership development firm summarises this habit as micromanagement. She argues that you need to stop.

I for one believe that even the current micromanaging by some top leadership under squeezing boils is just a temporary measure meant to adjust the system and make it effective. We do not expect that such style of leadership will remain to be the order of the day.

Management and human resource experts are clear that micromanaging dents worker’s morale by establishing a tone of mistrust–and it limits their capacity to grow. Did you know that micromanaging employees distract focus on important issues?

Thus, we should minimise this type of management. Of course, there are some exceptions where micromanaging can be called for, but leaders who are skillful will never entertain that and turn it into a habit. Micromanaging is only applied to bring things under control.

All things considered, it is possible that there are a few failures as your team learns to step up, but ultimately they will perform much, much better if there is no interference and mistrust.

In our context probably it is applied to weed out corrupt elements. The more leaders stay away from micromanaging, the greater accountability and less interference of subordinates in places of work. Enjoy Your Weekend!

SOURCE: Tanzania Daily News