Fire and Forget
I have always found micromanagers quite fascinating creatures. After almost 20 years being around many different workplaces, projects and situations, I cannot understand their logic, as much as I have silently studied them whenever I have found one out in the wild. And I am not talking here about the control-freak, paranoid manager who spies or abuses his or her direct reports. That’s more of a toxic, insecure psychopathic behavior which we could surely track back to a dysfunctional family or a childhood trauma. I am talking here about the comparatively less damaging manager who simply does not delegate and piles up stuff on their plate. Stuff they keep because: 1. They do not know how to delegate (they haven’t received training on how it’s done, some people need such eye-openers), 2. They want to stay “needed” and requested 3. Because they want to remain in their familiar territory: the fact technical managers tend to be promoted from specialized disciplines doesn’t really help because many cling to what they know and struggle to step out their comfort zones of knowledge.
Under the illusion of being relevant and required, micromanagers enslave themselves into the job up to burnout levels.
When I was promoted to a managerial position some years ago, I stayed for a while in a double capacity leading my previous team as well. After a while, it came clear to me I had to let it go; it felt quite wrong I was still doing that. First, I didn’t have the bandwidth anymore to pay the attention it deserved (or the attention my new role deserved), but more importantly because it was fair that someone else was promoted to lead it. Organizations must permanently show there is a path upwards and spread the message that excellence and commitment can lead to more responsibilities, and that it is not always about bringing “saviors” from outside to sort things out.
I struggle to dig micromanagers because, as a manager, there is nothing as rewarding as seeing something I used to do now being done and perfected by someone else. Why keep it for yourself? You can’t get someone to do it as well as you do it? Maybe a. You have a bit too big of a valuation of yourself b. You have to mentor and train them to get up to the level the task deserves. Delegating requires energy input, it does not magically happen. Otherwise, it’s just dumping.
In missile engineering, there is something called fire-and-forget. Fire-and-forget is a type of guidance which does not require further guidance after launch, and can hit its target without the launcher being in line-of-sight. It’s interesting the contrast of the word fire here. As opposed to letting someone go, fire here means the more literal to ignite. So let’s maybe use ignite instead of fire. Managers must ignite-and-forget. Show a clear target, light the wick, and let people fly on their own to make things better. Corrections in the trajectory shall be provided as needed or requested, as long as it doesn’t end up in going back behind the wheel, except for avoiding collision courses. Some lagom1 here is key.
It is always interesting to see companies crumbling when a manager leaves. That screams bad management; from the departing manager who did not delegate nor distribute properly, and from the company who did not detect this in due time. A good manager should be able to quit next week and the party should just go on.
Managers must work very hard to set everything in place in order to become meaningfully irrelevant: important for defining the game plan, for adjustments and corrections; invisible from the daily detailed work. For a manager, this kind of irrelevance is the ultimate flattery.
Lagom is a Swedish word which can be variously translated as "in moderation" or "in balance", or “in its right amount”.