Micromanaged or Given No Guidance.....Your Choice

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 22 May 2014 20:07:52 -0400

If you had to choice would you want to be micromanaged or given no guidance whatsoever in your job? Why?

Response by MAJ Robert (Bob) Petrarca made May 22 at 2014 8:23 PM

MAJ Robert (Bob) Petrarca — Thu, 22 May 2014 20:23:27 -0400

Good question CPT. All depends on the CDR's intent. If the guidance is clear and the complexity of the task at one's pay grade then let loose. If it involves ROE I'm happy to be micro, pico-managed if necessary, I'm SC, I'm a talker more than a fighter.

On the other side of the coin I liked to see what my subordinates could do when left to their own devices - again on pay grade+1 appropriate tasks. If it came down from the "old man" I'd tended to get involved to the point where my SNCOs would tell me to heel - respectfully of course, like, "Sir we got it, go to the PX and have a valium with your coffee"

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made May 22 at 2014 9:13 PM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 22 May 2014 21:13:56 -0400

No Guidance! Then they can't say anything about me doing what I want to do! You can bet that I will still get my job done above standard and on time.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made May 22 at 2014 9:30 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 22 May 2014 21:30:00 -0400

I would say No Guidance. You would be amazed at what a 2LT can do. Just give me a compass and I got this.

Response by MSG Wade Huffman made May 23 at 2014 7:09 AM

MSG Wade Huffman — Fri, 23 May 2014 07:09:24 -0400

Looks like a trend developing. I too would say that if those are my only two choices, give me the mission and no guidance. If someone is micro-managed, they are irrelevant to the mission at hand.
On a deeper level, both scenarios show a lack of good leadership in their own ways.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made May 23 at 2014 8:04 AM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 23 May 2014 08:04:27 -0400

Of the options I choose no guidance. I've been in both spots and lack of guidance gives me freedom to figure things out for myself and do things how I see fit. If the product I produce isn't liked well someone should've given me guidance and have no one to blame but themselves.
That said I prefer a happy balance, give me a right and a left to work with, even suggest were I can find some ideas or give me a template and then let me do it. But to try and work and have every move under the microscope drives me insane.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made May 23 at 2014 8:42 AM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 23 May 2014 08:42:00 -0400

I am going to say it depends.

If I am dropped cold into something with no intent or guidance to even determine what my mission or job is; then I am not going to be successful no matter how innovative or resourceful I am. It truly becomes taking a stab in the dark at something and hoping to find the bullseye. I have been in this situation before and it was a nightmare. I thought I was doing exactly what needed to be done (growing the business, increasing revenue, increase customer satisfaction) when the intent was that I would maintain the current situation as is. Well, there is no coming back from growth.

Conversely speaking, if I understand at least some symblance of my job....then I would prefer to be given no guidance. Often I learn the best and perform the best when I am permitted to review my resources and develop my own plan.

It is nice though when you have someone that you can turn to when you have questions, need guidance, or just need to bounce ideas off of. Someone non-obstrusive, but supportive in the same right. It helps keeps things on track and at a high-level of performance....especially in the FRAGO-minded world of the military.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made May 23 at 2014 8:57 AM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 23 May 2014 08:57:29 -0400

If given the mission, I would prefer no guidance

Response by SGT(P) Private RallyPoint Member made May 23 at 2014 9:30 AM

SGT(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 23 May 2014 09:30:17 -0400

I'd also rather have no guidance. I'm pretty good at figuring things out. Often times, I see things that can be done more efficiently and get frustrated when having to do it in a poorly planned manner. I also would rather be accountable for my own actions. I take ownership in what I do.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made May 23 at 2014 9:36 AM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 23 May 2014 09:36:12 -0400

If I had to choose. I would say probably micromanaged. If I wasn't guided and messed up in some way, I might cause the mission to not happen. I don't think I would be able to handle that if I were the cause to something going wrong on a high priority mission due to no guidance. It might not sound like a leadership trait but if I have to choose one or the other, I am taking it from the view point of a new recruit. Otherwise, I have very poor leadership above me to give me only those two choices and I would rather think better of leadership than that.

Response by SSG Aubrey Smith made May 23 at 2014 11:27 AM

SSG Aubrey Smith — Fri, 23 May 2014 11:27:20 -0400

to be honest it depends on your team if you have a squad of new Soldiers, then its gonna take guidance to show them how to do the job in the first place but once they're use to taking on certain task, then you can step away from giving guidance and allow them to work it out on their own. So use guidance if your team lack experience.

Response by SSgt Gregory Guina made May 23 at 2014 4:17 PM

SSgt Gregory Guina — Fri, 23 May 2014 16:17:11 -0400

If those are my choices then I am going with no guidance.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made May 23 at 2014 5:08 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 23 May 2014 17:08:51 -0400

I would have to say no guidance. As long as I start the position with clear understanding of what my job is then any mission within that framework is much easier to accomplish. However it is extremely frustrating in both instances. I've been down both paths in my career. No idea what was expected of me and getting yelled at for not doing what I didn't know needed to be done, and being yelled at for doing things a different, and I felt better way. In both instances I feel there is a lack of quality leadership. I've always tried to give clear guidance on what I expect to happen and allowed my subordinates to figure out the how part

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made May 24 at 2014 2:25 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 24 May 2014 14:25:01 -0400

Easy choice. No guidance. We are used to figuring things out with little or no direction anyways.

Response by Maj Walter Kilar made May 24 at 2014 2:42 PM

Maj Walter Kilar — Sat, 24 May 2014 14:42:03 -0400

"Never tell people how to do things. Tell them what to do and they will surprise you with their ingenuity." ~George S. Patton

No guidance. Micromanagement is the number one reason I am unhappy with my "leadership". Give me some "micro-leadership" in lieu of micromanagement, and maybe I would be happy. If I am a doer, then management should trust me to do the tasks that I am signed off to do. If I am a manager, then my manager should trust that I know the processes I need to manage without excessive and duplicative oversight. If I am leader, then I should be free to influence others to accomplish the mission. Micromanagers get in the way at all levels.

Response by GySgt Private RallyPoint Member made May 26 at 2014 8:33 AM

GySgt Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 26 May 2014 08:33:04 -0400

I would rather be given no guidance every time any micro-managed a single time. For me when someone tries to micro-manage me it makes me feel like they don't have any confidence in my abilities. On the flip side if I am going to micro-manage you then I might as well do it myself.

Response by SPC Christopher Smith made May 26 at 2014 9:31 AM

SPC Christopher Smith — Mon, 26 May 2014 09:31:39 -0400

I'll take No Guidance Given, there is ample ways to find knowledge about a job or position, failure sometimes is the best teacher. Micromanaging decreases efficiency, creativity, and ultimately ruins morale. Having someone on your back at all times if you are right or wrong drives down any motivation to actually complete the task given until the micro-manager comes around and finished their tyrant speeches.

Response by SGT James P. Davidson, MSM made May 27 at 2014 12:18 PM

SGT James P. Davidson, MSM — Tue, 27 May 2014 12:18:38 -0400

No guidance. In my experience, micro-managers are typically unsure of their own abilities, and therefore must see to every single detail someone else handles. Often times they take credit, as well, for other's contributions.

That, and micro-managers get on my last nerve immediately.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 1 at 2014 12:36 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 01 Aug 2014 00:36:38 -0400

If you're not given any guidance, you can't be wrong.

Response by LTC Paul Labrador made Aug 1 at 2014 8:56 AM

LTC Paul Labrador — Fri, 01 Aug 2014 08:56:13 -0400

Both are actually bad situations. But if I had to choose between the two, I'd say no guidance.

Response by 1LT Nick Kidwell made Aug 1 at 2014 9:06 AM

1LT Nick Kidwell — Fri, 01 Aug 2014 09:06:06 -0400

Gotta clarify...am I thinking back to my military career, or does the question apply to the civilian careers of veterans as well?

Guidance, please. (snicker)

Response by PO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 1 at 2014 9:34 AM

PO1 Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 01 Aug 2014 09:34:42 -0400

Frankly - neither is a good choice. Both are distinct signs of a lack of faith and trust by leadership. On one hand (micromanagement) leadership is signaling they would rather do the job themselves - which makes you a useless cog. On the other hand (no guidance) leadership is indicating they are too busy or too ignorant of what you do. While some may view no guidance as the preferable choice - how do you then justify your efforts or the hours you put in? How do you show the need for additional equipment, personnel, space, etc if the boss isn't aware? How do you justify excellent marks in your annual evaluations when the boss isn't there to show you where you might have gone too far or not far enough?

Too many times have I observed an individual on a task or in an office being busy as a bee - super productive - but when an auditor shows up or an IG or a command inspection - who then answers for the unguided individual? If all is well after the inspection leadership above you will certainly take all the credit but I can assure you leadership will be the first to say - "uh, that's not what we told him/her to do" if things don't go so well in the inspection.

Leadership has to be involved. Depending on your level of expertise you may signal that you're ready to take off the training wheels as early as day 2 of a new assignment - but never, ever try to indicate you are willing to accept no interface / face time with your boss.

Response by SGT Richard H. made Aug 1 at 2014 11:42 AM

SGT Richard H. — Fri, 01 Aug 2014 11:42:49 -0400

One more vote for "No Guidance". Micromanagement almost always leads to one-track solutions and inhibits ingenuity.

Response by Cpl Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 1 at 2014 12:33 PM

Cpl Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 01 Aug 2014 12:33:03 -0400

"Lead, follow or get out of way" I say given the two choices, no guidance. At least if I fail, I will have learned what not to do again. Being micromanaged you learn only to dislike what you are doing.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 1 at 2014 1:00 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 01 Aug 2014 13:00:05 -0400

No guidance. I had a PSG who was like that with me (he wasn't like that with every soldier in the platoon, only with the ones he trusted and knew they could handle it). He would tell me "I need this done" or "this is what needs to happen", my response was always "roger, I'm on it sarge" and he would leave me alone. After I was done, he always expected me to go give him an update, which was usually "It's done, sarge". I come from a civilian working environment where you worked at your own pace, finding your own way of getting the job done quick and efficiently, figuring stuff out on your own using TM's and stuff like that (I was a mechanic at a dealership before I joined), so when I have someone on my butt telling me how to do my job or any given task without letting me explore my options and finding my own way of getting the job done correctly and as quick as possible, it really bothers me. Makes me feel that you think I'm a dumb, incompetent person that can't take care of himself or accomplish any given task without having someone hold my hand, telling me how to do everything.
You cannot expect people to learn, be experts at they're job or even be leaders if you're always micromanaging, telling them how to do everything. You have to let them explore they're own ways and let them learn from they're mistakes. Experience makes for a better mentor and leader, better than a person that was told how to do everything.

Response by SSG Kevin McCulley made Aug 1 at 2014 5:52 PM

SSG Kevin McCulley — Fri, 01 Aug 2014 17:52:15 -0400

How about neither? How about give goals with left and right limits?

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 23 at 2014 9:26 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 23 Sep 2014 21:26:23 -0400

No question. No guidance is better.

I don't know if it helps with your OER but it makes things easy, do it the way you think it should be done.

Response by SGT Kristin Wiley made Sep 24 at 2014 6:31 PM

SGT Kristin Wiley — Wed, 24 Sep 2014 18:31:01 -0400

Both are awful, but no guidance at least allows you room to grow and problem solve.

Response by SSG Toryn Green made Sep 24 at 2014 6:49 PM

SSG Toryn Green — Wed, 24 Sep 2014 18:49:20 -0400

I was micro managed on my last deployment. There's nothing worse than a Major standing over your shoulder all day. I understand the need to know what's going on and be updated, but to me, if someone is doing that, it means they aren't trusting their NCOs. We need to be allowed to figure things out on our own, ask questions as needed, and learn.

Response by Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 25 at 2014 11:10 PM

Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 25 Sep 2014 23:10:39 -0400

I would say both are bad. It is possible IMO to have both. As a contractor I deal with a PM that wants things to be done his way. However, he never really gives us the guidance of exactly how to do the job or what he wanted excepted. He is super critical after the deliverable was given to him and wanted a thousand things to be changed. He is never happy with the first go of a product. If we try to get the info out of him early on he blows us off and tells to figure it out or get guidance from some other employee. The other employee's guidance is usually wrong.

The correct method would be to give the guidance on what needs to be done. How you expect the deliverable to look like, then let people go do it. As long as it meets the intent then it should be fine.

Response by SFC Mark Merino made Sep 26 at 2014 4:18 AM

SFC Mark Merino — Fri, 26 Sep 2014 04:18:27 -0400

"Never tell people how to do things. Tell them what to do and they will surprise you with their ingenuity." - George S. Patton