Sometimes when I'm talking with managers about providing close guidance, direction and support for their employees, when I tell managers, "You've got to use checklists every step of the way," sometimes managers will say to me, "Are you telling me to micromanage my employees? Are you telling me to be a micromanager?"

My view is: Micromanagement has become a big red-herring. I think micromanagement in the real world is extremely rare and in fact most cases that look like micromanagement are really undermanagement in disguise.

Let me give you an example: What about an employee who can't make decisions or take action without checking with his or her boss? Is that person being micromanaged or undermanaged? I think that person is being undermanaged and I'll tell you why. If you want that person to be able to make decisions and take action, you have to prepare that person in advance: "If A happens you do B; if C happens you do D; if E happens you do F; if G happens you do H. If Z happens, OK, well then you are on your own." After all, the decisions and actions that most employees take are not up to them. So if you want someone to be able to make decisions and take action you have to prepare that person in advance.

Here's another example: An employee uses his or her discretion and then gets burned for making a mistake. Is that person being micromanaged? I don't think so. I think that person is probably being undermanaged because probably nobody made it clear in advance exactly where that employee's discretion begins and where it ends.

Or what about the case where the manager says, "Here, do it however you think it should be done." But then the manager comes along in a couple of hours or a couple of days or a couple of weeks and says, "What are you doing? Why are you doing it that way? Here, move over, let me show you or you know what? Let me just take it back to my office and do it myself." Is that micromanagement? I don't think so. That's almost always undermanagement because almost always what's happened is that the manager has not spelled out clear goals in advance. The manager has not broken the project into step-by-step instructions. The manager hasn't provided enough guidelines and parameters so that the employee could do the tasks and responsibilities independently.

Is there any example of real micromanagement out there? I'll tell you the closest I've been able to come to a real example of micromanagement. The foreman: Imagine the foreman is looking over the shoulder of the carpenter. And there's one hammer but two people. And the foreman says, "Let's hold the hammer together. Let's put the nail here. Let's hit it: whack, whack, whack." One hammer, two people. Is that micromanagement? Maybe that's micromanagement. But in that case, there are only a handful of possibilities.

One possibility is: The manager is obsessive-compulsive. Now that's not a management problem, that's a medical problem and you need to get that manager some tablets.

Another possibility is: The manager doesn't really want to be managing an employee but rather wants a beck-and-call assistant. A beck-and-call assistant is somebody who the manager uses as a marionette to take actions that the manager could probably take him or herself. "Get so and so on the phone for me. Here, get me a cup of coffee. Taste the coffee, is it hot enough? Here, feed me." That's a beck-and-call assistant. And it's the very rare manager who can justify having a beck-and-call assistant and it's the very rare individual who can handle playing that role.

What's another possibility? Another possibility is that the manager just doesn't know this employee; doesn't know what this employee is capable of; doesn't know how much direction and feedback this employee needs. Now that's probably a case where the manager needs to spend more time guiding and directing that employee for a while in order to figure out what is the appropriate scope of responsibility for that person.

Here's another possibility. Another possibility is that the manager just does not know how to do the basics of effective delegation.

Effective delegation is a very simple art. It consists of the assignment of a clear goal, the establishment of a concrete time line and spelling out all of the guidelines and parameters in advance. That's delegation.

The only questions are: How big should the goal be for this person with this task, at this time? What should the time line look like for this person with this task at this time? And how many guidelines and parameters does this person need with this task at this time?

And it's different for every person.

Our very simple rule of delegation is: You need to start with small goals and short time lines and spell out all the guidelines and parameters. If an employee delivers, you give that person a bigger goal with a little bit of a longer time line and maybe you don't have to spell out quite as many guidelines. If the person delivers, then you give that person a bigger goal or bigger constellation of goals, a longer time line, and maybe instead of a checklist for the checklist, you just give that person a checklist of guidelines.

That's what DEVELOPMENT looks like and that's how you use delegation to gradually expand the sphere of responsibility for each employee to the appropriate scope for that person with that task at that time.

BONUS MANAGEMENT BEST PRACTICE
For each of your employees, try this: In your next one-on-one meeting, talk through your expectations in clear and straightforward terms. Write it down in the form of a checklist. Ask the individual to use the checklist and make notes on it during the course of the week. In your next subsequent one-on-one, ask for an account of the individual's work, and go over the checklist together. Take notes on your own copy of the checklist. If something seems out of sync with your sense of the facts, then use some additional methods of gathering information. If this method works for you, consider using it from now on.