Great article, James. I would say this advice applies to any business. If you watch Undercover Boss, it reveals what not being in the details leads to and the discovery, empathy, and positive change that happens when you get back into the details.
Conducting an in-depth discussion with peers and direct reports will be beneficial, but it should be approached in a way that doesn’t come across as micromanagement.
Conducting regular or frequent deep dives can sometimes convey an unintended message to the other person. Therefore, it is essential to connect these reviews to a clear objective and drive the discussion toward that goal. Without a defined focus, deep dives may lead to inconclusive outcomes that are difficult to predict.
That is nicely said, James; we as leaders need to be hands-on, and not only that, we need to know what exactly is happening with no BS. We learned all of these fancy management styles and delegation models, but the real thing happened with you digging deeper as Musk does.
I like and used for a while Kim Scott's definition of a micromanager, and one of the point is that micromanagers don't shared information: they tell you what to do, want to stay in control, don't want you to learn, and as such, isolate their team from the rest of the org, both ways. So, not really of the good type. The opposite, the absentee manager, is no better and it's basically what you described: someone who abdicates instead of delegates.
What she proposed as a middle ground is actually for me way more than just a balance between both, but an actual different view of what is management: a thought partners. Asking questions, helping unblocking, knowing the problems and challenging the decisions on both side. I don't think I can know everything that happens in my org, not even on my team, but I am at least curious and try and ask questions and request and provide clear overview of what's really going on. I don't expect everyone to have the answer immediately, but I expect them to look for it when ask and keep tab on what's important. That's what a manager should be, and IMO, make the manager a valuable position rather than just a clutch for teams that need help.
Great article, James. I would say this advice applies to any business. If you watch Undercover Boss, it reveals what not being in the details leads to and the discovery, empathy, and positive change that happens when you get back into the details.
100%.
Conducting an in-depth discussion with peers and direct reports will be beneficial, but it should be approached in a way that doesn’t come across as micromanagement.
Conducting regular or frequent deep dives can sometimes convey an unintended message to the other person. Therefore, it is essential to connect these reviews to a clear objective and drive the discussion toward that goal. Without a defined focus, deep dives may lead to inconclusive outcomes that are difficult to predict.
That is nicely said, James; we as leaders need to be hands-on, and not only that, we need to know what exactly is happening with no BS. We learned all of these fancy management styles and delegation models, but the real thing happened with you digging deeper as Musk does.
I like and used for a while Kim Scott's definition of a micromanager, and one of the point is that micromanagers don't shared information: they tell you what to do, want to stay in control, don't want you to learn, and as such, isolate their team from the rest of the org, both ways. So, not really of the good type. The opposite, the absentee manager, is no better and it's basically what you described: someone who abdicates instead of delegates.
What she proposed as a middle ground is actually for me way more than just a balance between both, but an actual different view of what is management: a thought partners. Asking questions, helping unblocking, knowing the problems and challenging the decisions on both side. I don't think I can know everything that happens in my org, not even on my team, but I am at least curious and try and ask questions and request and provide clear overview of what's really going on. I don't expect everyone to have the answer immediately, but I expect them to look for it when ask and keep tab on what's important. That's what a manager should be, and IMO, make the manager a valuable position rather than just a clutch for teams that need help.