Managing Micromanagement Triggers with Logic Trees

In our previous sessions, we discussed examples of large logic tree frameworks. These frameworks are tools to help you manage your impulses to micromanage. When you feel triggered to intervene, the questions in these frameworks guide you to determine if the issue truly lies with the team member or elsewhere.

The logic tree questions are designed so that a "no" answer at any point indicates that the team member is not necessarily at fault. Instead, it might highlight gaps in expectations, training, or processes. A "no" answer suggests the need for process changes rather than placing blame on the individual.

It's essential to maintain a mindset shift: understanding that mistakes are not always the team member’s fault. Micromanagers often view their team members as inherently wrong, creating a self-fulfilling prophecy. This mindset leads to a tendency to look for faults to avoid cognitive dissonance.

The logic tree framework encourages you to slow down and be intentional. If process changes are identified, correct the individual in a non-blaming manner. For example, instead of saying:

"Hey, this code isn't organized well. Can you fix it?"

You might say:

"Hey, I noticed the code could be clearer. It made me realize we might not have provided adequate training on our standards. That was my mistake, but can you make this change? Let's schedule some training to reinforce it."

This approach acknowledges any managerial gaps and provides constructive feedback without blaming the team member.

The Logic of Double-Checking Assumptions

If all answers in the logic tree are "yes," it's crucial to verify these assumptions with the team member. Ask them candidly if your assumptions were correct, such as:

"Did you receive adequate training?"

Or:

"Was the timeline communicated clearly?"

Adopting a curious rather than judgmental tone encourages honest responses. Be open to the possibility that your assumptions might be wrong.

If your assumptions are correct, highlight the issue as the team member's area of responsibility. Allow them to fix the work themselves. Correcting it yourself signals a lack of faith in their abilities and hampers their professional development.

Handling Frequency and Trust Issues

Minimizing triggers can be challenging, especially if you struggle with trust. If you find it hard to let go of the need to get information, you might end up managing many triggers and spending a lot of time on logic trees.

Remember, not trusting your team may stem from seeing them as wrong. But unless you've made poor hiring choices, it's unlikely they are always wrong. Logic trees help inject reason into the process, shifting your perception from untrustworthy to trustworthy.

Conversely, frequent corrections reinforce your micromanager image. Mapping out many logic trees can be overwhelming. In these situations, resist taking immediate action. Remind yourself that the team member was not wrong, which helps break down your critical image and their perception of your constant oversight.

If needed, bring these moments to a micro-management detox coach. They can provide feedback on whether the situation warranted intervention and help manage your impulses.

Next Steps: Managing the Urge to Correct

Feeling the need to correct your team member is natural. However, bottling up these impulses can be challenging. In the next section, we will discuss strategies for managing the urge to correct your team member without immediate intervention.