A question of my own if I may, to build on what you're saying: When I'm in a leadership position I've had the tendency to micromanage, resulting in resentment from my group. Then I've let them take their own route and they've fucked the job up horribly. I don't actually enjoy telling people "I told you so," but isn't there a sort of understanding to be had when the leader says he knows what he's doing? Or is it truly better to compromise the success of your project so that every member feels included? I'm not trying to justify my micromanaging, just offering that scenario as an example.
I think the key to any successful manager is to manage to the individual and not the group. Even if it is a group project comprised of only 2 people. Different people have different needs, different motivating factors etc. Some people may require more hand-holding and may even appreciate it. But when you hold everyones hand by default, you are asking for resentment. Any team is comprised of individuals and every good coach knows this and approaches it thusly. Celebrate your successes together and manage your challenges on an individual basis. Good things will happen.
I would slightly amend that to say that a successful manager manages results, not people. A leader is responsible for making sure standards and deadlines are met. S/he accomplishes this by ensuring communication is happening, progress is occurring at an acceptable pace, and obstacles/conflicts are dealt with. Otherwise, the individual or group should be left to accomplish things as they see fit.
The best leaders I have had have also been "coaches" people that see my strengths and leave them be but find an area where I can improve and help me do so. I have been fortunate to have several leaders like this during my career.
Yeah, me too. I once had a leader call a multi-thousand-dollar error on my part "an educational investment." He then explained to me what I should've done differently and I never heard anything else about it. It was awesome because A) I knew how to avoid that mistake in the future (and I guarantee you I never made that mistake again) and B) I felt a lot more confident in my job and my leadership, and confidence plus security kind of naturally results in better work overall. It was a great way to handle it.
Aha, I might've been neglecting the individuals' contributions/potential in the group for the total product. I appreciate the tip.But when you hold everyones hand by default, you are asking for resentment.
You also have no idea what the "micromanaging" was. Nor do you know how long the person had been at the site/job. Trust is a thing, and it's perfectly normal for a leader to watch more closely until the leader starts trusting them. That isn't anything negative against either individual, it's just how life works. It goes both ways too, if the individual trusts that the leader isn't doing it to be a jackass, they're less likely to get offended by it.