[garciasn]

I believe what you're saying amounts of effective leadership.

I feel there's a very LARGE and DISTINCT difference between effective management and micromanagement. The article's points show that when dealing with a micromanager, you're dealing with a narcissist. Nothing the employee does is right; the manager's path forward is likely not even possible; and, most importantly, only the manager feels they themselves can do it correctly.

When a team is underperforming, there are ways to help out which do not amount to nitpicks and providing poor direction. Offering very direct support and feedback is NOT micromanagement.

[lazide]

If you’re having to go through item by item to give direct support, and explicit feedback for literally everything the person is doing - I’d consider that micromanagement if done to me, no matter who was doing it or why.

I think most people would consider that the case. There is also the trope of the ‘micromanager’ who is the insecure ‘I asked 5 minutes ago, why isn’t it done exactly right already’ type. They might be narcissists, but I’ve seen plenty who weren’t - insecurity always plays a huge part, and seems correlated with workaholism too. They micromanage everyone.

It’s entirely possible to be micromanaged by someone due to something you’re doing, and by someone who isn’t a micromanager or prone to micromanaging. They’ll hate it, but they have reasons why specifically they are doing it with you that may suck to hear, but probably have some grounding in reality. I’ve been on both sides of this and it sucks on both sides.

It’s also possible to work for someone that micromanages everyone because that’s who they are.