Micromanagement and Silos Style of Administration

Cite this

Micromanagement refers to a negative management style that involves extreme control and close supervision of an individual’s workload and output. Micromanagers generally avoid entrusting administrative authorities to workers. Instead, they seem to be excessively obsessed with collecting information hence forcing workers to produce regular comprehensive reports that are regularly unnecessary (Mishra et al., 2019). The cause of micromanagement can be a result of personal or institutional factors. Various personality traits such as insecurity and perfectionism lead to micromanagement as well as a lack of trust or respect between the employee and the manager. Additionally, it emerges if the manager feels that the employees are incompetent. Institutional causes can be due to pressure from above in need of managers to achieve better results.

On the other hand, the silos style of management refers to a type of management whereby employees working in the same company purposely do not share important information concerning the business (Serrat, 2017). The silos form of behavior in management can happen unknowingly or through political intrigues by design or design flaws. Various factors cause silos behavior in an organization’s management. Silos style of management can be a result of bad relationships between the manager and the employees. When there is a conflict between the executive and the employees, it leads to distrust and poor communication. If the company’s management does not communicate with its employees, then the entire organization will face communication challenges. Moreover, silos can emerge due to a lack of team mentality. Lack of team mentality in the working community causes the company to lose focus on its goal.

The current manager’s micromanagement and silos style of management should be changed in the company. Micromanaging can be very toxic in organizations, and managers must understand the harm it can cause. For instance, on employees, micromanagement causes stress, frustration, and burnout (Mishra et al., 2019). This is caused by the manager criticizing all their subordinates’ activity. Similarly, it leads to decreased productivity in the organization, poor health, and mental well-being. Also, it damages employee trust in the company. Fostering loyalty and trust in an organization is an essential competitive advantage that takes a long time to develop. Thus, when employees are under micromanagement and silos, trust is broken, and a sense of loyalty in the organization diminishes.

Therefore, micromanagement and Silos should be controlled for the organization to achieve its objective with the help of employees. To avoid this form of management, first, it should be recognized (Wendell and Bell, 1999). Micromanagement and Silos can be exposed by investigating the company’s decision flow and communication. For instance, one should consider how the manager delivers information to his employees. Similarly, are employees involved in the company’s decision-making?

Once discovered, the activity should be structured to give the company’s workforce a better understanding of what it entails. The micromanager should be trained to resolve his micromanagement and silos style of administration. However, if the manager is trained and does not resolve his form administration, then he should be transferred, reassigned, or replaced. Also, I would ensure that all workers understand what is expected of them. Sometimes, micromanagement is created when administrators do not understand their responsibilities clearly. For instance, if they do not know what is expected of them and whether their performance is being judged.

Delegation is one of the most significant output skills administrators should have. Therefore, I would encourage the manager to delegate his duties. Delegation leads to good communication between the manager and the employee, builds mutual trust, and establishes accountability and stability (Wendell and Bell, 1999). I would encourage the manager to have room for mistakes. This leads to an administrative environment that is open to new ideas and innovation. When mistakes happen, then it is a clear understanding that workers are taking part in decision making and are also taking risks.

I would reduce the manager’s workload by flattening the organization and doing away with unnecessary hierarchy. Reducing the manager’s workload and delegating duties to workers increases employee’s working skills, organizational commitment, job satisfaction, and knowledge. Additionally, it changes the silos form of style since all workers in the organization will interact and share information. Moreover, I would substitute micromanagement with leadership (White, 2010). Thus, being firm with policies but flexible with strategies. I would create a communication-free atmosphere by inspiring workers to speak up and share their views. I would also ensure that their opinions are valued and considered. Finally, I would assess whether the changes have been met positively.

Changing micromanagement and silos forms of administration reduce the risk of employee alienation, mistrust and improve communication. In a working community where there is effective communication, the organization is most likely to achieve its objective (Serrat, 2017). Besides, it helps managers perform their duties of controlling, organizing, and motivating. Thus, making employees feel that they are important in the organization improves their cooperation. This leads to new ideas and innovations that will assist the working community and the organization attains its purpose.

Managers greatly determine the organization’s success. Thus, they should communicate with subordinates in a good manner, trust them and provide them with the information needed to accomplish their tasks (Mishra et al., 2019). With such qualities, employees will have a friendly working environment which improves their organization’s commitment.


Mishra, N. Rajkumar, M. & Mishra, R. (2019). Micromanagement: An Employers’ Perspective. International Journal of Scientific & Technology Research, 8(10). Web.

Bridging Organizational Silos. Knowledge Solutions, 711-716. Web.

Wendell, F. & Bell, C. (1999). Organization Development: Behavioral Science Interventions for Organization Improvement (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

White, R. (2010). The Micromanagement Disease: Symptoms, Diagnosis, and Cure. Public Personnel Management, 39(1), 71-76.

Cite this paper

Select style


BusinessEssay. (2022, July 23). Micromanagement and Silos Style of Administration. Retrieved from https://business-essay.com/micromanagement-and-silos-style-of-administration/


BusinessEssay. (2022, July 23). Micromanagement and Silos Style of Administration. https://business-essay.com/micromanagement-and-silos-style-of-administration/

Work Cited

"Micromanagement and Silos Style of Administration." BusinessEssay, 23 July 2022, business-essay.com/micromanagement-and-silos-style-of-administration/.


BusinessEssay. (2022) 'Micromanagement and Silos Style of Administration'. 23 July.


BusinessEssay. 2022. "Micromanagement and Silos Style of Administration." July 23, 2022. https://business-essay.com/micromanagement-and-silos-style-of-administration/.

1. BusinessEssay. "Micromanagement and Silos Style of Administration." July 23, 2022. https://business-essay.com/micromanagement-and-silos-style-of-administration/.


BusinessEssay. "Micromanagement and Silos Style of Administration." July 23, 2022. https://business-essay.com/micromanagement-and-silos-style-of-administration/.