Two words that get used a lot these days are micromanagement and harassment. If you are being micromanaged, you will usually experience feelings of being harassed.
Conversely, if you are experiencing harassment, most of the time it is not due to micromanagement.
This article dissects the two concepts and provides some guidance for managers who, despite their good intentions, often end up doing more harm than good.
Harassment
Harassment is the abusive behavior toward another person that has its roots in a desire to annoy or hurt the other individual in some way. The practice is normally intentional, although it is possible for a person to harass other people without being aware it is happening. Harassment is close to the concept of bullying, and it is becoming more prevalent with electronic communication, especially among adolescents.
Except in the rare extreme cases, the manifestation of harassment exists first in the opinion of the person who is being harassed. If I will not let you get to me no matter what you do, then you are not going to be very successful at harassing me.
In fact, I may get a perverse pleasure out of thwarting your attempts to bother me: a kind of reverse harassment.
On the other hand, you may be such a sensitive individual that the mere thought of a certain person walking into the room sends you into a flight of panic: a kind of self harassment called paranoia.
We are all aware of the destructive nature of harassment that evokes anything from mild discomfort all the way to suicide. The distress is always amplified if the person being harassed believes he or she cannot escape and has to endure continual suffering.
Micromanagement
Micromanagement usually doesn’t stem from sinister motives. To the contrary, it is normally the desire of a manager, or person in charge of getting things done, who wants things to go well but is misguided in the best way to accomplish the task.
It reminds me of my favorite Star Trek Quote when Mr. Spock says,
“It is curious how often you humans manage to obtain that which you do not want.” (TOH Charlie Green).
The micromanager is not trying to annoy the victim (usually) but only trying to get things done according to his or her warped definition of how to accomplish the objective. In the process, of course, the victim has to endure the constant meddling that feels very much like harassment.
We are all aware of the antidote for micromanagement, which is for the manager to set the objective and some broad guidelines and then back off to let the individual figure out the details on how to get the job done. The manager might say, “I’m not going to hover over you while you get this done, but I’m available if you need me.”
Unfortunately, a little concept called “trust” is missing, so the manager does not believe the individual is capable of getting the job done without constant supervision. This lack of trust is the root cause of most micromanagement.
We deal with the manifestations of micromanagement to some degree in most work settings. It is only the most extreme high trust environments where managers are willing to actually stand by and let subordinates do things wrong in order to learn what does not work.
We learn more from our mistakes than we do from our successes.
They would rather intervene and at least suggest that holding the soldering iron by the pointed end might not be the best method. I use that extreme case because the motive of the manager in this case is to prevent the employee from doing bodily harm. What could be more noble than that?
Often what feels like micromanagement to the employee is done for the benefit of the employee.
The grey area between good intentions and oppressive hovering is playing out in the workplace every hour of every day. Managers find their own equilibrium, and employees either complain (or not) behind the break room doors. Eventually a good employee will get tired of the intrusion and simply leave the organization. This reaction is a prime cause of the disruptive and expensive problem called turnover.
The extreme case, where managers tell people how to do their work for the sport of always getting it done their way, crosses the line into harassment. Even if the conscious objective is to get the job “done right,” the spirit with which the manager directs every movement is debilitating.
Bob Whipple, MBA, CPLP, is a consultant, trainer, speaker, and author in the areas of leadership and trust. He is the author of four books: 1.The Trust Factor: Advanced Leadership for Professionals (2003), 2. Understanding E-Body Language: Building Trust Online (2006), 3. Leading with Trust is Like Sailing Downwind (2009), and 4. Trust in Transition: Navigating Organizational Change (2014). In addition, he has authored over 600 articles and videos on various topics in leadership and trust. Bob has many years as a senior executive with a Fortune 500 Company and with non-profit organizations. For more information, or to bring Bob in to speak at your next event, contact him at http://www.Leadergrow.com, bwhipple@leadergrow.com or 585.392.7763
Posted by trustambassador 
I wrote the core of this article several years ago, and it was so popular that I am dusting it off with some additional information and ideas to enhance the analysis. The article is about the habit of replying “No problem” when someone says “Thank you.”
Body language gestures of the mouth are usually straightforward, but there are some tricky nuances to consider. First we will consider the most recognizable gesture: the smile. Actually, there are many different types of smiles to identify.
The advantages of working in a high trust environment are evident to everyone from the CEO to the shop floor, from suppliers to customers, and even the competition. Building and maintaining trust within any organization pays off with many benefits.
My article last week was about body language with the eyes. I kept the focus (no pun intended) on three aspects of ways we communicate with our eyes. They were: 1) eye contact, 2) pupil dilation, and 3) blinking rate. There are a host of other ways we communicate with gestures around the eyes, and this article will deal with several of them, even though no single blog article can cover them all.
How many times a week do you hear leaders say, “We’ve got to motivate our people?” Those words and the actions they generate seldom lead to a sustained improvement in motivation. The above phrase is one of the most common phrases leaders or managers use every day. So what’s wrong with it?
You have probably been in a situation where you have felt micromanaged. You were given something to do, but then badgered about exactly how to do it.
One interesting gesture of body language between two people is when a listener holds his or her head up using both hands while at the same time looking directly at the speaker. Earlier in this series 
This morning I had a vivid dream. I was in Virginia getting ready to do a full-day leadership seminar at a large manufacturing plant. I had flown in the day before in order to be fresh in the morning. Before dinner, I went for a walk around their beautiful campus to absorb the atmosphere and get myself in the mood.
Last week I discussed interpreting electronic body language. Decoding electronic body language well is the mirror image of being sensitive to the messages we write. Let’s look at some important, but often overlooked, principles of clear electronic communication. Here are six key principles to consider: