Perils of micromanagement

Leaders who micromanage typically operate from a position of fear, writes P John J Kennedy

Even as the global workplace continues its rapid evolution, marked by hybrid work models, flexible hours, and a renewed focus on employee wellbeing, many Indian organisations remain moored to outdated managerial practices rooted in control, visibility, and hierarchy. A telling incident recently shared on Reddit highlights the problem: an Indian employee at the local office of a European company, recovering from a minor injury, was allowed by their Europe-based manager to work remotely.

However, the Indian HR intervened, demanding that the employee take additional leave despite being able and willing to work from home. The result? Frustration, wasted leave, and a mounting workload. Though seemingly anecdotal, this scenario reflects a broader, systemic malaise in Indian work culture: a deep-rooted trust deficit manifested in chronic micromanagement.

In a world increasingly moving toward trust-based, output-oriented cultures, the persistence of rigid control mechanisms in India threatens employee morale and organisational agility, innovation, and competitiveness.

A barrier to progress

Micromanagement isn’t just a personality flaw. It’s a systemic dysfunction and a red flag for leadership maturity. Leaders who micromanage typically operate from a position of fear: fear of losing control, being outshone, or rendered redundant. This insecurity manifests as over-supervision, second-guessing, and a refusal to delegate. A 2021 McKinsey study revealed that 75% of employees who felt micromanaged also reported disengagement, while 71% said they had considered quitting.

These are not minor inconveniences; they are indicators of an organisational culture that breeds burnout, mistrust, and high attrition. Psychological research consistently shows that micromanagement stifles creativity, delays decision-making, and erodes confidence. Employees in such environments become risk-averse, hesitant, and increasingly dependent, fearing reprimand for initiative. Workplaces under micromanagement don’t grow; they stagnate.

By contrast, autonomy is a powerful driver of productivity. A Harvard Business Review article titled “Why Do So Many Managers Avoid Giving Employees Autonomy?” found that many managers conflate autonomy with loss of control when the opposite is true. Gallup research shows that companies with high employee engagement, fueled by trust and autonomy, outperform peers by 21% in profitability and 17% in productivity.

Hierarchy and control

Why does micromanagement persist strongly in India, even when job roles and global trends demand autonomy? The answer lies partly in India’s cultural DNA. Indian corporate structures have long echoed the country’s feudal social order, where obedience is valorised and questioning authority is frowned upon. Respect for hierarchy is often mistaken for respect itself. Hence, India ranks high on Hofstede’s “power distance index,” a metric used to measure hierarchical gaps in organisations.

This cultural predisposition filters into HR policies, daily interactions, and performance appraisals. Attendance logs and FaceTime still matter more in many offices than innovation or impact. Flexibility is treated as a discretionary favour, not a structural right, even in roles that could be effectively executed remotely.

This mindset is further compounded by tone-deaf comments from prominent business leaders calling for 70-hour workweeks and expressing regret over not mandating Sunday work reflect a dated industrial-era understanding of productivity - one that equates hours logged with commitment, disregarding employee wellbeing and creative output.

The crisis of relevance

The Covid-19 pandemic was a stress test for workplace cultures, and many Indian firms failed to evolve. Although Western multinationals embraced permanent hybrid models, Indian IT giants like TCS and Infosys rolled back remote work privileges. The result? Widespread employee backlash and attrition, especially among younger workers who expect flexibility and trust as baseline conditions of employment.

In today’s knowledge economy, insisting on control over trust is not only counterproductive. It is a recipe for irrelevance. Technology now enables asynchronous collaboration and real-time performance tracking, rendering outdated control mechanisms obsolete. Companies that fail to adapt will lose top talent to more progressive, globally-aligned competitors.

What must be done?

Escaping the micromanagement trap requires more than a policy shift. It demands a cultural transformation. Some practical interventions include:

Leadership development: Invest in training to promote emotional intelligence, delegation, and trust-based leadership.

Redefine metrics: Shift from monitoring inputs (like hours or attendance) to evaluating outcomes and impact.

Empower HR: Move HR from a rule-enforcing department to a people-first enabler of flexibility and growth.

Feedback mechanisms: Introduce 360-degree feedback to hold managers accountable and encourage participatory leadership.

Highlight role models: Showcase leaders and companies practising trust-driven management to normalise and reward the shift.

Trust is a prerequisite

In the modern workplace, trust is not a luxury. It is the cornerstone of innovation, agility, and sustained performance. Indian companies that fail to shed micromanagement mindsets risk not only internal stagnation but also global irrelevance. At a time when the battle for talent is fierce and distributed work is the norm, cultivating trust is no longer optional but existential. Leading well begins with letting go. Only when leaders stop hovering and start trusting can organisations and their people truly grow.

(The author is an independent writer with 35 years of experience in leadership)