Micromanaging can stifle your team’s growth and create a toxic work environment. In this episode, Gwen Bortner and Tonya Kubo explore the fine line between oversight and micromanagement and how to empower your team to achieve consistent performance without constantly looking over their shoulders. Discover practical strategies for setting clear expectations, fostering trust, and creating a culture of accountability that allows your team to thrive. Plus, learn how to break the micromanaging cycle and create a more sustainable and fulfilling work experience for both you and your team.
—
Watch the episode here
Listen to the podcast here
Micromanagement Mayhem? How To Empower, Not Overwhelm, Your Team
How do great leaders maintain momentum without micromanaging? In this episode, we are tackling one of the biggest challenges we see growing businesses face, which is ensuring consistent performance without the CEO having constant oversight. Gwen, we’re going to cover a key aspect of sustainable success for entrepreneurs, which is how much they have to call every single shot. When your business depends too heavily on your constant presence, it becomes unsustainable.
We’ll explore how to break this cycle and create systems that support consistent performance. Gwen, I’m going to start us right off with the hard question, which is the average woman who is following the show, how often do you think she truly micromanages versus errors on the side of being too hands-off for fear of micromanaging?
Why Leaders Micromanage Certain Tasks
It depends on the task.
Say more.
On the tasks that they don’t like, they err on not doing enough. On the tasks that they do like or have great emotional affinity for and they feel like they’re the most important thing in the business, they err on doing too much.
How have you seen that play out? Give me a couple of general examples.
I’ll use me.
I could use me too if you want.
Sometimes it’s good to own our stuff. I will tend to come closer to completely advocating marketing activities because it’s not what I like and understand. It frustrates me. There are all sorts of things and you know all of this.
It breaks your brain is what I say.
I will tend to fall on the side of advocation for sure versus micromanagement. You will be the first to admit I do not micromanage marketing at all. On the other side, things that I do care about, I’m pretty good at it because I’ve been paying attention to them for a long time but I am much more attentive to little details and will micromanage them.
In our WCA, I want the format to be just so. I confess to Sophia right off the bat. I was like, “I know this is ridiculously picky but it bugs the bejeebers out of me.” I’m a little more conscious about it than most. I don’t think I do it on lots of things but there are some things that I do it. I pay attention to it. In this case, it’s about client delivery and I do care about it a lot. It’s a piece that I will own forever as long as I’m actively involved in the business. That’s where it divides.
I also think the micromanagement piece is more likely for folks with a stronger perfectionist tendency than those without. People who have a stronger perfectionist tendency know what right is. They’re very clear in their mind what’s right and the things that are not right are also very clear. There’s not lots of gray. It’s pretty much A or B and there’s not anything in between.
The more comfortable you are with the gray and/or the gray is a bigger swath, I also think you tend to micromanage less. The third piece that comes into the micromanagement is the level of trust. The more you trust, the less you need to micromanage. Part of the trust is also good delegation processes, which we’ve talked about in other episodes. Trust is a weird thing because you have to give it before you earn it but you have to earn it to keep it.
It is mind-numbing.
It’s complicated. The more you trust someone, the less you’re worried that it’s not going to be delivered in the way at the quality level with all of the things that typically get associated with micromanagement.
I don’t think this is as widespread but in some cases, micromanagement bubbles up with insecurity. That’s what you’re talking about with the trust piece. “I’m not sure that person represents our organization well. Therefore, I need to see every email they sent.” I’ll use myself as an example here. I don’t mind people using AI to support them in their writing. However, I do not want to see blatant copy-paste AI language on anything that’s public-facing.
It takes a lot for me to trust a new writer that I’m working with to know that they’re not going to do that. I can be super micromanaging about writing that I commission until I know that somebody else has the same basic line of demarcation and judgment that I do with it. It does come down to trust. What we can say is that insecurity is a sign that there’s a trust issue. It’s not necessarily a sign of some big character flaw or moral failing.
That insecurity usually is about a trust issue. Trust is a weird thing because you have to give it to some degree but to keep it, you’ve got to earn it. I can give you something and trust you to do it well. If you don’t, then that trust is eroded and you’ve got to earn it to regain or keep it. If I don’t trust you at all, then there’s no way for you to ever earn it in the first place. In the beginning, it’s a very weird complex equation that has to go on. Typically, we start in smaller pieces, which can also then feel like micromanaging.
Trust is a weird thing because you have to give it to some degree but to keep it, you've got to earn it. Share on XOversight Vs. Micromanagement: Key Differences
All of us who are business owners, we all want the same thing. We want consistency and performance, consistency and delivery. Ideally, we want to be able to not micromanage our team and subcontractors to get that. I also think that it requires that we understand the difference between oversight and micromanagement. Can you give us a definition of that or at least explain it so that all of us can understand, Gwen?
For me, micromanagement is people having to check in every step. It may not truly be every step but lots and lots of steps from point A to the final deliverable. If you’re checking in once, that may not be micromanagement but it could be depending on how much is in between A and B. Oversight is about looking at results. Oversight is where I start seeing accountability start running up against each other, which is a positive thing.
Are we doing the thing that we say that we’re doing in the deliverable or the final result that we say that we’re going to do it? I want to make sure everything along the way is exactly the way I would have done it. In some cases, those pieces are important but not always. More often than not, not always. Often, we think, “This is the way it has to be done.” Does it? Is that true?
Sometimes we’ve put things in because someone needed more management and then we get someone else doing the role. It’s like, “We don’t need that to be true anymore. We’ve been going through a whole bunch of process work and rework.” We’ve realized there are a couple of things that are like, “The reason we’re doing this is because of a situation or a person in a role.” It’s 2 or 3 back.
Years ago, this one thing happened. We made a process so that that one thing never happened again. We created a system where that thing could never happen. Why are we doing the extra work?
That’s where that balance to me is coming in. Oversight versus micromanagement. Does it have to be done this exact way or not? The easiest example is responding to emails. If you’ve got multiple people who are responding to emails, have a process that says, “This is oversight and these are the guidelines or the framework that we want you to use.” I’m not going to make the words exactly this way. There may be a time someone uses a word and it’s like, “We don’t say that.”
We don’t realize that that’s a thing until we get there. That may feel like micromanagement at the moment but only if we’re checking every time to see if that word is there. That’s when it becomes micromanagement. Oversight is checking every once in a while and saying, “That seems okay.” It is not how I would say it but it covers all of the things that we wanted to say. It is done in a way that matches the tone and behavior of the company. We can be sarcastic when we’re talking about it but we can’t be sarcastic in our emails.
If you get an email from us with an exclamation point, know that I wrote that and Gwen didn’t.
I do those, too. If it has emojis, that’s Tonya. I’m not exactly sure how to put the emojis into the email. One of the things is we have a generic email address that we also use and part of it is whoever is responding, make sure that they own the name to it.
They identify themselves as early as possible in the email.
We want to know that there is a real person behind it. We also want to know if something goes astray with it there is responsibility for that person to own what may or may not have gone wrong with the email.
I’ll add a third point to that. I trained Sophia on this. It also frees up that person who’s writing from feeling like they have to write in somebody else’s voice. If you’re not a trained writer, writing in a corporate voice or the CEO’s voice is a skill that some people devote a lifetime to.
Very few people can do it.
Setting Expectations For Team Success
What we’re realizing in 2025 is that it’s not that important. The person receiving the email cares less that everything that comes to them was written by the CEO than they do about the problem getting solved in a quick fashion. My next question is based on what you were saying, Gwen. We’re talking about oversight versus micromanagement. It sounds like to me that what we’re talking about is setting clear expectations. If you set clear expectations, then you can hold people accountable to those expectations and you’re not having to dictate every step or call every shot. How do you recommend a CEO establish clear expectations?
For me, it’s always about focusing on the result first and then how you get that result as effectively as possible. We were talking about this in our book club meeting. I use effective versus efficient. Efficient is part of effective but effective isn’t necessarily part of efficient. Efficient is important but effective is also doing the right thing, not just doing it fast or in the least amount of time possible.
Sometimes effective takes longer than efficient. That’s okay, too. Starting with what is the result and then working on getting it to be as effective as possible is one of the ways that you reduce micromanagement. When we are focused on exactly how we do it, what we often do is miss what we are trying to accomplish. When we’re worried about how we do it, it’s more about maintaining the status quo.
When we’re focused on the result, we can look and say, “There’s an easier way to do this.” It allows the team member who owns the result to put their creativity, experience, knowledge, and thought processes to the problem. Sometimes they may come up with something that doesn’t work. A part of oversight is to say, “This feels like this is better but it’s not here so why it’s a problem?” It also helps them understand the element that they’re missing on it.
We have a couple of clients who have businesses that require a whole different level of privacy and security than a lot of our clients have. That changes how some things have to be done. It’s like, “Why do we have to do these sixteen steps?” Part of it is because that matters for this business and industry but it doesn’t mean that it’s right for everyone.
Another business could get the same result with way fewer steps but it’s because there’s not that requirement in there. That to me is the balance between result versus the micromanage of you have to do it this way. Sometimes there are elements like you have to do it this way because there is a reason. Sometimes that feels like micromanagement but that’s not micromanagement.
What I like about what you were sharing is that when you start with the results like, “This is what winning looks like,” and you set your expectations from there, then you’re able to create clear expectations that empower the team member to carry them out to the best of their ability so long as they achieve the result versus saying, “You have to follow the ten-point checklist or else.” It doesn’t matter how many points. That’s not the point of the example here but when we hand people a checklist, what we’re training them to do is to check boxes. We get frustrated as CEOs when they run out of boxes to check and they don’t intuitively know what to do next.
This is the place between what’s real delegation, which takes time, as opposed to the delegation that we are often sold as a bill of goods. Real delegation is they own the result and the responsibility for getting the result in the ultimate way that it needs to be delivered, which could be time quality. There are all sorts of things that go along with that. Before we get there, we need the ten-point checklist to say, “This is what we’re going for. This is currently how we do it.”
Often, I’ve seen the other side of the equation. It’s like, “This is what we have. Make that happen.” People are like, “I don’t know how to make it. I may know how but I don’t know how in your environment because I don’t know where to find the file.” This is where that ten-point checklist comes in. At some point, there’s a space in between those two that they need to be able to say, “Is this the best way to do it?”
We establish clear expectations. You’ve talked at length about how to do that in a way that empowers the team members rather than boxes them in feeling like they have to ask permission before they can take the next step. You also talked a bit about accountability and where accountability and trust come into all of this to dig into the accountability piece a little bit more.
This is another area where people confuse that with micromanagement or they don’t know how to hold people accountable without micromanaging them. What are some ways that you would suggest in terms of maybe creating feedback loops to maintain the high performance that doesn’t put you in the place where you feel like you have to call every single shot?
Creating Accountability Without Micromanaging
Go back to results, know what you’re trying to get the results, and then work with the person, whoever it is. It depends on where they are in this delegation process, which is not a 2-day process delegation. It is usually at least 1 month, even for simple things, and often up to 6 months for complex things. It is a long process. It’s about getting agreement about what we’re doing and how we’re checking in along the way.
Early on, it could be that we’re going to make sure that we’ve done all ten steps. We’re going to look at the result and say, “We got the results.” “Did you do all ten steps?” “Yeah, I did all ten steps.” “Did you have any questions about it?” “No, I didn’t.” We’re going to move it further and say, “We’re going to let you do this and I’m going to check at the end of the week.” This is the whole process.
At the end of the week, we look and say, “This worked 9 times out of 10. What happened in the tenth situation?” Notice that I didn’t say, “Why did you not do it? Why did it fail?” It’s a question of what happened. “What happened is I didn’t use the checklist.” What we learned from that is that we need to use the checklist even when we think we’ve got it in our head.
This variable came up and I didn’t know how to solve it. That’s often the case. The question is, “What do you think you should have done? What did you choose to do?” It involves the other person in the process so they can gain more insight and responsibility going forward. Even though you know what the answer should be, it’s not about giving the answer. That’s the thing that happens. When there are a lot of times that we micromanage, it’s faster to give the answer. We feel like we’re time crunched.
I’m going to tell you how to do it because that’s the fastest way. When we tell someone how to do it or how to solve this particular piece, they aren’t engaging in how to solve the problem, which is a different thing than how to do the thing. If we want them to have responsibility and not have to micromanage them, they have to know how to solve the problem.
There’ll be another problem that comes up and it may be completely different but once they have 2 or 3 problems, they’ll start seeing it like, “This problem is different than that problem but it’s the same. I’m going to try this first and then this.” They start seeing how to solve the problem, which allows it to become the responsibility piece where they can own the responsibility but also by doing that, they can say, “This problem comes up 3 times out of 10. Can we do something that prevents that problem from coming up?” All of a sudden, we’re looking toward effectiveness.
You laid out a beautiful process, not just establishing effectiveness versus efficiency but how you can build that trust through the systems and processes you have in place to empower your team. What I heard you discuss is you’re giving them the opportunity to show that you can trust them and see that they can trust you not to take everything away from them the first time they make a mistake.
It’s also teaching them that they can trust themselves.
Empowering Teams To Trust Their Decisions
You have to say more about that. Why is that important in this whole piece? We’re talking about me as a CEO ensuring consistency and performance among my team without calling every shot. Why do I need them to trust themselves?
There always are going to be things that you can’t predefine. It is the nature of life. As soon as you realize that, the more that people can trust themselves to solve that problem know what the right answer is, and likely make the right choice. Also, trust that their making a wrong choice is not a firing offense unless it is because some people do foolish things.
Most of the things that people worry about getting fired over, you would never fire them over, at least not the first time. If it keeps repeating, that’s a whole different conversation and a completely different thing. This is not what we’re talking about. As they start to trust themselves, they’re willing to risk a little bit more in how they’re going to stretch in making their choices and doing things. The more that they trust themselves, then that’s the less you have to do.
Let’s say they can trust themselves like, “It’s probably A, B, or C. A is the most likely but it also could be B or C. I’m going to start with A. If it doesn’t work, then I’m going to do B. If it doesn’t work, I’m going to do C. I’m then going to go talk to the CEO or owner.” That has saved a whole lot of conversation and time. The CEO often says, “If they would have come to me, then I could have told them the right answer.” The next time it happens, they will know. It’s always about whether you are solving the problem for today you or tomorrow you.
Today’s Work Vs. Tomorrow’s Success
Gwen, in case anybody doesn’t know the answer to that question, what should the average CEO be solving for?
Tomorrow you.
Why?
It’s because today you will have to do it every single solitary time. Sure, it’s only 5 minutes but it’s 5 minutes once a week for eternity.
I love how fatalistic that turned. You will do it forever.
Whereas it’s 15 minutes today, 5 minutes next week, 1 minute the week after that, and it’s never again.
I have to know this though. you might not have an answer for this but can you think of a business owner, client, or maybe even somebody you know who was able to successfully transition in this way and went from thinking they had to call all the shots to being able to have a team that was empowered to do the thing that they have been entrusted to do consistently?
I’m trying to think of a good specific.
I was going to say, you’re like, “There are so many examples, Tonya. I can’t even come up with one.”
There are lots of examples but the thing is there are always micro-examples. It’s not like, “I totally solved this problem and it’s never a problem ever again.” There are places where it happens and then places that are like, “That didn’t happen and I have to work on it here.” I’m going to pick on my husband on this one.
This is fun. We never bring Arlis into the show.
He’s a good guy. He’s a CIO. When he took on the role of vice president, he often still did a lot of the maintenance work. It was faster for him to do it because he knew all of the pieces of doing the maintenance work, even though he had some good people working for him. His whole thing was, “I’m showing them so they know how to do it.”
I’ve been doing this coaching for a long time and sometimes I can’t help myself so I was telling him, “You’re showing them but they’re not learning in the same way as if they had to figure it out.” It took some time. At one point, I said, “How do you know all of this?” He said, “I figured it out.” They know that you’re a resource and they can come to you when they truly get stuck but the way you’re doing it, you’re going to continue to have to work with them doing their work. You have a completely different job you’re supposed to be doing.
You’re feeling overworked because you’re doing the job you used to do and the job that you’re supposed to do. It took a while before we got there but we got it. There are still times when something will come up and it’s like, “No, I need to be available.” It’s usually because the person who would normally do it isn’t. They’re out sick or whatever’s going on. That’s a different situation.
To me, this is exactly that example. That’s what’s happening when you’re answering at every solitary time when you’re micromanaging. When you’re not doing their job, that frees you up to do your job. That’s the whole today you versus tomorrow you. With today you, it’s easier to do their job right that moment than it is to let them struggle through it. Tomorrow you have that time to do the things you’re only capable of doing, not them.
When you're not doing their job, that frees you up to do your job. Share on XTo sum up, all of this is about taking care of your future self.
Also, the future self of the business.
Also, the employee or team member. To bring this full circle back to what we’re talking about in the show entirely, this is what sustainable success is about. It’s about taking care of your future self and the business you have now while also taking care of the business you want to have years from now. When your business depends too heavily on you doing all the things or calling all the shots, that’s when you get spread too thin and you want to burn things to the ground. As the CEO, and Gwen, you would agree, it’s a cycle that only you can break.
Sustainable success is about taking care of your future self, taking care of the business you have today while also taking care of the business you want to have three to five years from now. Share on XThis is one of the things that no one can fix other than you. Going back to the example we talked about, if you’re always in the middle of it, then you also can’t be the person to help solve it when there is an emergency and something truly unique happens. That’s part of what you need to be able to do. There will be times that you’re going to have to come in and do something for whatever reason. There are lots of possibilities but if that’s the norm, then there’s no space for that. That is where that burnout happens.
I’m already maxed. When something goes slightly astray, I’m overwhelmed. Things are always going to go slightly astray. It’s the nature of life, business, and everything. You’ve got to have space for that. That means that other folks are taking care of the smaller, slightly astray things. That’s by empowering them. Empowering them means not micromanaging. They’ve got to get to where you trust them and they trust themselves. The result is mostly right most of the time because it’s not going to be perfect.
Delegation: The Key To Sustainable Growth
That was such a great summary, Gwen. Thank you. You did my part for me. You took care of the future me. I love it when you do that. What I will say to our dear audience is to spend some time with this. This is an episode you might have to reread a couple of times to understand first of all how you can apply it to your specific circumstances. What I have to do to maintain momentum in my business without micromanaging might be a bit different than you. It depends on what consistent performance looks like and the size of the team.
I’m going to say that if you would like support in this type of thing or to get some outside perspective and other aspects of your business, we have something special for you. It’s called Insight to Impact. It’s our premium weekly email subscription that helps you gain clarity on your business one reflection at a time. What we mean by that is that every Friday, you get an email that has one thought-provoking question that’s designed to help you think a little bit more deeply about a specific aspect of your business.
When you respond, we respond. You get personal feedback 99.9% of the time from Gwen and .01% of the time maybe from me when Gwen’s on vacation but you get personal feedback that will help you implement positive changes that create sustainable, consistent performance across your business over time. Head over to EverydayEffectiveness.com/Impact to learn more.
Mentioned In This Episode
About Your Hosts
Gwen Bortner has spent four decades advising executives and entrepreneurs in 45+ industries. She helps women succeed in business without sacrificing happiness by identifying their true desires and aligning their business functions. She spots overlooked bottlenecks and crafts efficient plans toward sustainable success that center your values and priorities. Known for her unique approach to problem-solving and accountability through the G.E.A.R.S. framework, Gwen empowers clients to achieve their definition of success without sacrificing what matters most.
Tonya Kubo is a marketing strategist and community builder who helps entrepreneurs build thriving online communities. As co-host of The Business You Really Want and Chief Marketing and Operations Officer (CMOO) at Everyday Effectiveness, she keeps conversations on track and ensures complex business concepts are accessible to everyone. A master facilitator with 18+ years of experience in online community building, Tonya takes a people-first approach to marketing and centers the human experience in all she does.
