Why do we micro-manage so much

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 12 Jan 2014 16:51:32 -0500

I find more and more that we are not allowing people to fail. Soldiers are not challenged because we don't allow them to fail and learn from their mistakes. Primary example....Closeout formation safety briefs. If you are a Soldier in the United States Army, you SHOULD know it's not okay to beat your wife, beat your dog, drive drunk, race your car, leave your children, spend all your money, steal, rape, or pillage. Call me crazy but I should not have to pull my squad aside and say anything more than "don't do anything stupid" and "have a safe weekend". Are people at higher levels afraid of being accountable for what a junior Soldier did? As a leader when I get a new Soldier they know from the initial counseling what is appropriate and what is not.

With the Army downsizing so much I would think they would almost encourage "survival of the fittest". Let the stellar Soldiers shine and the problem children get the boot.

This is more of a rant than anything but I know I'm not the only one that feels this way.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 12 at 2014 6:48 PM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 12 Jan 2014 18:48:04 -0500

All of those safety briefs are more about covering our public backsides more than anything else. When Soldiers fail, the public automatically wants a scapegoat. We as a society want to believe that someone else is at fault, not the individual. I see it everyday in my teenager's school. We have to change the culture and start holding our Soldiers accountable. It's true that sometimes, a leader fails to properly train their troops and that is the cause of the failure, bit more often than not, that is not the case. Let's stop trying to point out who is to blame and start figuring out how to solve the problem.

Response by LTC George Tobias III made Jan 12 at 2014 7:00 PM

LTC George Tobias III — Sun, 12 Jan 2014 19:00:35 -0500

Fear of failure is the main reason for micromanagement. When I was in command of my company, my LTC stayed constantly in my business. I do know that leadership requires allowing someone the task and duties to begin with. Not doing it for them. Commanders are so afraid of allowing everyone to do what they should, that they just don't. We are becoming the Army of the 70's after the big drawdown, and this also causes more of a do as I say not as I do mentality. After the VOL ARMY integrated after Vietnam their were ripples all over the place. Most NCO's could not adapt to the dramatic changes, so they simply got out. I have always allowed my juniors to do their job, unless they gave me reason to question it. Fear of fear, that is the micromanagers reason for doing everything. It doesn't season well when missions have to be done.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 12 at 2014 8:25 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 12 Jan 2014 20:25:28 -0500

According to GEN Wes Clark's book it's because we can (hated that book)

I think it's because micro managers promote micro managers.

Response by SPC Dave St.Andrew made Jan 19 at 2014 5:27 PM

SPC Dave St.Andrew — Sun, 19 Jan 2014 17:27:36 -0500

I don't think it's necessary, especially having to text or call your team leader and tell them all your plans for that particular day on a weekend. We are grown men, we should be able to act as such, of course there are going to be a few bad eggs, but the leadership should take the time to recognize those that may pose a problem and counsel those individuals, not micro manage soldiers that have been in for a minute and have never even received a negative counseling.<br>

Response by 1SG Steven Stankovich made Jan 19 at 2014 5:35 PM

1SG Steven Stankovich — Sun, 19 Jan 2014 17:35:32 -0500

I'd like to answer here in two parts SSG DeSario. First, in my opinion, I do not consider the safety briefing during the end of week close out formation to be micro-managing. Yes, the same topics are covered over, and over again, but take a step back and look at it like this. One of the things that we as leaders are charged with is to ensure that our Soldiers are equipped with all the tools and knowledge to make the right decisions and to be successful. By taking the time and explaining to them in great detail that drinking and driving is bad and bad things will happen if you do it, sexual harassment/assault is bad and bad and bad things will happen if you do it or do not intervene, drugs are bad and bad things will happen if you do drugs, etc, etc, etc. Once formation is over, those Soldiers will either take heed to what you said to them or they will not. I slept peacefully every night as a PSG and 1SG knowing that I provided my guys and gals the tools to make the right decisions. Using those tools was up to them.

Second, leaders who micromanage on a daily basis have a fear of failure, as LTC Tobias stated, and some have to be that guy or gal in the spot light to their higher. They say things like "look what I did" or "I told them to do it that way and that is why it was a success." Either way, it does not afford Soldiers the opportunity to learn and grow. By engaging in that style of management, you are doing a disservice to your Soldiers, your unit and in a much bigger context, the Army. That is a leadership failure.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 19 at 2014 5:50 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 19 Jan 2014 17:50:48 -0500

Micro-management is alive and kicking nowadays are for fear of liability, and it always starts off with statistics:

I remember being able to drive a military vehicle with just a beret/patrol cap...Rollover rates made that into PPE.

Suicide rates/marital problems/financial problems increase...USA SLRTT is mandated to populate Service member's proposed risk.

Deaths on installation while running: PT belts at all times as well as no distractors (cell phones/music/head phones)

I feel just as you do, SSG DeSerio. It's just that trust nowadays isn't what it used to be.

Response by SFC Joe S. Davis Jr., MSM, DSL made Jan 19 at 2014 6:13 PM

SFC Joe S. Davis Jr., MSM, DSL — Sun, 19 Jan 2014 18:13:35 -0500

SSG DeSerio in my opinion, as leaders it's our duty to take care of the health and welfare of our Soldiers, as a former Drill Sergeant at Fort Benning, I realized that I had to do micro-manage more than ever because it was my duty as a NCO and more so at permanent duty. Their actions on or off duty is still a reflection on leadership. That is the difference between civilian and military, going on 25 years in the Army and it hasn't change since I came in. I don't foresee the end; simple Soldiers are always going make stupid mistakes at all levels (ranks). Its life, but the leader/Soldier must foster a professional demeanor on and off duty and instill Army Values to your subordinates. It comes with maturity, rank and wisdom. I know where you coming from, I have came in at all times of the day, because of others mishaps, but as they say it builds character. It's called "embracing the suck", somebody must be held accountable and usually the finger always points at the first line leadership. It really doesn't make it right, but like I said, the health and welfare of the Soldier as stated in the NCO Creed.

Response by SFC James Baber made Jan 19 at 2014 9:27 PM

SFC James Baber — Sun, 19 Jan 2014 21:27:52 -0500

I have two descriptions to hit on, one as already mentioned is the fear of failure, but there is more to that I will hit on in a minute, the second issue is the power of control issue, many leaders, especially CDRs have this control issue of power as they have to prove they are the ones in charge, everyone knows the CDR is the boss, now whether or not s/he knows what they are really doing is subjective at times, but that having to prove you are in charge all the time detracts from anyone being to learn and grow within their jobs and ranks because of the power trip of that command.

Now back to the first issue, society as a whole is to blame for the fear of failure thing, it is just not distinctive to the military, sometime during the 90s along with many changes created during the Clinton administration, I am not bashing him, it is just that most came during and from his time, society changed from holding the individual accountable for their actions, and it started with childhood, remember "no child left behind" (Clinton), well it changed the way kids are treated and graded in school, I will give an example, I have a female cousin who didn't finish high school but was supposedly on the honor roll, yet she couldn't add change properly, and didn't know the difference between our and are for sentence structure yet she was an A/B student, because no one is supposed to get grades below Cs anymore, that is producing stupidity more than knowledge, that is how it started. You have sports where everyone gets a trophy or gets to play because if not it cause psychological issues, BS it is part of the new PC world, this had led to the changes in the military where you could no longer yell at Soldiers, curse at them, had to allow them their time off no matter if they earned it or not, you can't punish them verbally, physically, or sometimes even in writing as it is not conducive, again BS, it never harmed anyone from my generation that grew up in the military and served our 20+ years, and most of us never had any DUIs, drug issues, rapes, weapons charges, embezzlements, etc. etc., but this is the norm for most of today's Army from PVT through General.

Society has made it so that no one is ever responsible for their own actions anymore it has to be someone else's fault or responsibility, I am not saying that we need to verbally or physically abuse SMs, but there are times when a strong abrasive tone or voice gets the point across and does prevent the situation from arising or occurring again. Sometimes physical conditioning also becomes a useful tool twofold, it helps to sometimes prevent the issue from occurring again and also builds the Soldier up physically as well. I do believe leaders should be involved in their Soldiers discipline, but I don't feel they should be held accountable for their subordinates actions as an adult, they can do the paperwork as needed, but shouldn't have to babysit them at a mandated class for their misgivings, while I can see supervising punishment in certain circumstances, they shouldn't have to be there 24/7, if that is the case, each level of leadership would fall under the same umbrella, if they PSG is responsible for the Soldier than the 1SG/BN CSM/BDE CSM etc. is responsible as well and should be there as well, in reality we know this is nor would never happen, so it shouldn't happen for that PSG or 1st line supervisor either as the Soldier in question is an adult and should be treated as one and given the punishment or mandated class and told be there or suffer the consequences even further for disobeying a direct order simple and to the point.

Until we get rid of or change the societal restrictions it will never change and will only continue to get progressively worse as it has over the last decade plus.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 21 at 2014 1:25 AM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 21 Jan 2014 01:25:17 -0500

I am in it for the power. Seriously we set ourselves up for failure by not establishing boundaries and then wonder where we went wrong.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 22 at 2014 7:39 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 22 Jan 2014 07:39:42 -0500

I think we tend to micro manage the less knowledgeable
Soldiers we have in our Army. We do this
to make sure that the job, task or mission is completed to standard and on time. I have done it in my career and know that it
was the best thing to do at the time. We
cover our own butts and try to give the Soldier the benefit of the doubt. We know that if they mess up we have to redo
the task or get our butts chewed. I just
want to keep tabs on the status of what they do and if they are being
productive.

Response by CPT Mike M. made Jan 22 at 2014 7:55 AM

CPT Mike M. — Wed, 22 Jan 2014 07:55:55 -0500

Fear of failure. Once in key leadership positions, some units are so unforgiving that the first time something falls through the cracks you're either screwed on your eval or people get relieved. Fear of that is making leaders lost trust in their subordinates' ability to accomplish a task in situations where they normally would trust them. Especially with the Army downsizing now, we're going to become a bit more of a "zero defect" military where the first time people screw up or something less than positive goes on their record they'll be hit by a separation board.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 22 at 2014 7:59 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 22 Jan 2014 07:59:12 -0500

In my opinion, The Army has a problem with micro management because of the lack of leadership at the lower levels. One thing that was stated in this thread is "Why does a Team Leader/Squad Leader get held accountable for another SM's screw-up?" While I do agree with you that you have no control over that SM's actions, you do however have control over how you are going to react, train and mentor that Soldier.

Too many times have I seen a Soldier screw up; the leader looks to a book and counseling and some office to send them to. Is that is supposed to fix the problem?Right there is the problem. If your Soldier screws up it's your responsibility to ensure he or she is reprimanded fairly (don't involve emotion cause he took your time, make sure its fair if someone else is trying to railroad him/her), recieves proper training to prevent a future occurance, and mentor that Soldier to make better choices.

Another problem why we micro manage is because too many leaders dont actually know their Soldiers. If you take the time to actually get to know your joes, you will find out which ones like to go home with family, which ones may go out drinking (be approachable for them they might just call you and when they do go get them) and you will definitely find out which ones will most likely have issues. Check in on your joes you dont have to do it constantly but a simple "Hey how's your weekend?" on a saturday morning says "I care about you".

Response by COL Dick Williams made Jan 22 at 2014 9:10 AM

COL Dick Williams — Wed, 22 Jan 2014 09:10:55 -0500

Usually the micromanaging individual is very insecure in his/her position and is very afraid that a subordinate will make a mistake and it will reflect on him. The old "Zero Defects" mentality of the Brigade that I was assigned to in the 82nd Abn. fostered this mentality/fear in each level of the chain of command. The solution to this is several fold. First, training must be comprehensive and mastered at every level. Second, the chain should be ready to let individuals and teams to pursue solutions to their given missions and be given the opportunity to make mistakes. We all learn by mistakes and are better for it. Third, those who do the job correctly should be recognized so that the entire unit understands that the job done well is appreciated. Finally, if mistakes are made, a critique should be done with a mutually agreed to training plan to ensure improvement is gained.

Response by SFC Michael Hasbun made Jan 23 at 2014 3:11 AM

SFC Michael Hasbun — Thu, 23 Jan 2014 03:11:17 -0500

Simply put? Trust. Some people just don't have faith that things will get done in their absence, or that their people will do the right thing in the absence of their presence.