Beyond Control: Understanding the Hidden Beliefs that Fuel Micromanagement

Listen to this article:

Abstract: This article explores the psychological drivers underlying micromanagement behaviors in organizational leaders. Drawing from scholarly literature in management, leadership, and psychology, common hidden beliefs that can fuel micromanagement are identified, including needs for certainty, perfectionism, external locus of control tendencies, and distrust or control issues. The article delineates how these unconscious beliefs manifest as identifiable thought patterns and micromanaging workplace behaviors amongst leaders. Practical suggestions are then provided for how organizations and leaders can work to develop self-awareness of underlying motivations and gradually reshape unhelpful beliefs through assessment, open discussion, flexibility experiments, empowering work structures, and general workplace support. Two brief case studies illustrate the sustainable progress that is possible when leaders address deeper psychological drivers of their previous micromanagement. The goal of this article is to enhance understanding of micromanagement's root causes in order to foster empowering work environments and optimal leader and employee functioning.

We've all likely encountered or heard stories about micromanaging leaders in the workplace before. You know the type - constantly hovering over employees, mandating minute-by-minute updates, scrutinizing every tiny decision and detail. On the surface, micromanagement seems to be about exerting an excessive level of control and involvement. But what often goes unseen are the underlying beliefs, thought patterns, and deeper psychological or emotional needs that truly fuel these counterproductive behaviors. As consultants and leaders, if we want to effectively address micromanagement at its root, we must gain insight into these hidden drivers.

Today we will explore what lies beneath the surface of micromanagement and examine some common internal factors that can motivate micromanagement, such as a need for certainty, perfectionism, trust issues, and fears of loss of control.

The Need for Certainty

One common driver behind micromanagement is an intolerance of uncertainty and a strong psychological need for certainty, structure, and control. As research by Albuquerque et al. (2018) found, individuals with high levels of this type of intolerance tend to adopt more controlling management styles. When faced with ambiguity, they feel anxious and feel the need to eliminate unknown factors. This need for certainty can then manifest as micromanaging behaviors like over-prescriptive instructions, excessive planning, and resistance to employees' autonomy and initiative-taking.

Thought patterns: "I need to have all the details planned out upfront to feel secure." "If things are left up to employees, there are too many things that could go wrong."

Manifest behaviors: Rigid adherence to step-by-step guidelines with little flexibility. Overly detailed pre-planning and task breakdowns. Resistance to unforeseen issues or more fluid, emergent problem-solving.

To address this, leaders must become more aware of when their certainty-seeking thought patterns are driving micromanagement. They can then challenge these thoughts by tolerating ambiguity and learning to find confidence in their ability to problem-solve unfamiliar situations rather than always eliminate unknowns proactively through control. Meditation and other mindfulness techniques can help build tolerance of uncertainty as well.

Perfectionism

For some leaders, a deep-seated need to do things "perfectly" or a fear of failure or mistakes can fuel micromanagement. Research by Sukhbir Singh Sandhu & Bahaudin G. Mujtaba (2007) shows perfectionism is positively correlated with leaders displaying more controlling management styles. When perfectionistic thought patterns are left unchecked, leaders may feel constant pressure to eliminate any chance of errors or imperfect results by scrutinizing employees' work extensively.

Thought patterns: "If I don't check their work myself, it won't be good enough." "I'm the only one who can do things properly."

Manifest behaviors: Extreme attention to minor details, re-doing tasks themselves, lack of delegation. Nitpicking employees’ work and deliverables. Micro-analysis and "re-works" even when quality is already high enough.

To counter perfectionism, leaders must reframe what constitutes "quality" vs. "perfection." They can benefit from celebrating reasonable mistakes as learning opportunities, giving positive yet minimal feedback, focusing on employee development over output evaluation, and reducing fear of imperfections. Developing self-compassion can also help leaders feel less driven to seek perfect outcomes and constant assurance.

Control Issues and Trust Deficits

For some leaders plagued by past experiences of feeling out of control or betrayed, micromanagement may be an attempt to exert control as a defense mechanism against future unknowns. As research by Donaldson-Feilder & Yarker (2007) showed, leaders high in external locus of control tendencies (believing outcomes are externally driven) were more likely to micromanage. These leaders struggle to trust others' capabilities and must guarantee results themselves through hands-on control.

Thought patterns: "I can't trust that employees will get things right without me checking up on them constantly." "If I give up control, chaos will ensue."

Manifest behaviors: Refusal to delegate meaningful work or decision authority. Routine "check ins" and status updates demanded of employees. Verifying employees’ work or decisions rather than accepting their judgments.

To address control issues, leaders can work on developing a more internal locus of control by acknowledging their ability to positively influence outcomes through less controlling, collaborative approaches. Building honest rapport and one-on-one relationships with direct reports can help foster the psychological safety to gradually release control through trust-building over time. Counseling may also help address underlying sources of distrust.

To address control issues, leaders can work on developing a more internal locus of control by acknowledging their ability to positively influence outcomes through less controlling, collaborative approaches. Building honest rapport and one-on-one relationships with direct reports can help foster the psychological safety to gradually release control through trust-building over time. Counseling may also help address underlying sources of distrust

Practical Applications in the Workplace

Now that we have a window into some of micromanagement's hidden psychological and emotional drivers, how can organizations and leaders put this understanding into practice? Here are a few suggestions:

• Assessment. Leaders can anonymously assess their own beliefs using an inventory. Then reflecting on if tendencies like perfectionism, uncertainty avoidance, or external locus of control drive their behaviors.

• Awareness. Discussing common drivers openly and honestly with direct reports helps surface assumptions. Asking for candid feedback on behaviors can promote awareness too.

• Flexibility. Leaders commit to experimenting with modestly loosening control by tolerating some ambiguity or error. Gradual exposure helps flex psychological tendencies over time.

• Empowerment. Structure work to give employees meaningful autonomy, decision rights, delegation of authority and responsibility while providing support not oversight.

• Support. The organization supports leaders' flexibility experiments by not penalizing reasonable mistakes or redirecting back to old controlling habits which perpetuate drives behind them.

• Well-being. Implement stress-reduction strategies. When leaders feel secure and supported, needs for certainty, control diminish allowing more flexible, trusting styles to emerge.

Let's consider how some of these ideas have played out in practice:

Jane, an operations director known for micromanaging, took a hard look at how her need for control stemmed from past experiences. With her reports' help, she committed to only provide high-level guidance, not instructions, on their newest project. Though ambiguity caused stress, taking a step back paid off, building trust and autonomy in her team.

Alex, a perfectionistic manager, struggled to accept anything less than flawless work. After assessment and feedback, he acknowledged how this drove behavior and began positively reinforcing reasonable risk-taking. Allowing room for experimentation and learning boosted employee engagement and innovation.

Through openness, awareness and small behavioral adjustments supported by their organizations, Jane and Alex were able to reshape the unconscious beliefs fueling their previous micromanagement. By addressing deeper psychological drivers, sustainable progress in leadership flexibility and trust-building can be achieved.

Conclusion

Today we explored how micromanagement is often underpinned by hidden beliefs leaders may not even be fully aware of, such as needs for certainty, perfectionism, control issues and trust deficits. These inner psychological and emotional drivers can seriously undermine collaboration, empowerment and performance if left unaddressed. However, with honest reflection, empirical assessment and gradual experimentation supported within flexible organizational cultures, leaders have the capacity to recognize and reform unhelpful thought patterns over time. A deeper understanding of these hidden beliefs behind the façade of controlling behaviors is key to fostering work environments of empowerment, where both leaders and employees can thrive freely and to their greatest potential.

References

1. Albuquerque, I. R., Pedrini, T. C., & Turrioni, J. B. (2018). Tolerance of uncertainty and entrepreneurial orientation: Test of a moderated mediation model. Revista de Administração, 53, 118-129.

2. Donaldson-Feilder, E. J., & Bond, F. W. (2004). The relative importance of psychological acceptance and emotional intelligence to workplace well-being. British Journal of Guidance & Counselling, 32(2), 187–203.

3. Sandhu, S. S., & Mujtaba, B. G. (2007). Job stress, job performance and organizational commitment: The case of American manufacturing managers. Journal of American Academy of Business, 10(2), 71-78.

---

Jonathan H. Westover, PhD is Chief Academic & Learning Officer (HCI Academy); Associate Dean and Director of HR Programs (WGU); Professor, Organizational Leadership (UVU); OD/HR/Leadership Consultant (Human Capital Innovations). Read Jonathan Westover's executive profile here.

---

Suggested Citation: Westover, J. H. (2025). Beyond Control: Understanding the Hidden Beliefs that Fuel Micromanagement. Human Capital Leadership Review, 27(4). doi.org/10.70175/hclreview.2020.27.4.3