Micromanaging Case Study

A chasm between management theory and practice leaves behind the harrowing question of how to improve employee work performance. Research has proven that some methods are more fitting than others on a situational basis. The key is to adopt practices that work the best for an organization’s goals and capabilities and consciously work towards progression. However, having a strategy to improve performance goals and objectives, are often only as effective as the people who have the responsibility for seeing them through. A strategy that is ineffective or poorly used can often cause more damage than good by reducing morale, creating confusion and decreasing performance. There are numerous ways to tackle more suitable practices that can add

This theory can be both progressive and damaging depending on the circumstances. Employees ultimately need feedback and a manager who is willing to hear them out and help when they are seeking guidance. There appears to be problems with both the hands off approach, and the contrast of micro managing that shows the need to balance both methods. It’s beneficial for supervisors to understand the two approaches to know when to step in and when to step back. Micromanaging is typically used in a negative context as it can be extremely frustrating and stressful for employees to deal with a manager who is controlling their every action. According to Entrepreneur magazine micromanaging can be avoided when expectations are clearly and frequently articulated, and employees are held accountable to each other which again points out the important of communication (Erb, 2008). At Bridge Worldwide a company now renamed as Possible Worldwide, agency employees are surveyed anonymously to provide feedback to other teams quarterly. This is an attempt to create a more productive company culture, and so far it has worked for this results driven company (Erb, 2008). Once a Cincinnati-based marketing firm they have extended into a global market. They have provided digital solution marketing to several top brands such as Microsoft, Procter and Gamble, and Coca-Cola (Atchison, 2015). With that being said, improving performance is not always a one size fits all method that can be taken in theory and applied to other places; it might not work well with everyone. There are disadvantages with performance evaluations and self-evaluations and this is especially true if they are not applied properly or taken seriously. They can often turn into a one sided conversation even if the intention is to have an open dialogue between a manager and employee, as sometimes one person is