Leaders, sometimes the best action is no action– to sit and wait.

Yes, that’s counterintuitive. In fact, as a leadership coach I almost can’t believe I’m advocating inaction! After all, aren’t we supposed to act on our ideas, take action steps to progress toward our goals, and not passively expect positive change without some action on our part?

All true. Dream jobs don’t fall from the sky (unless, perhaps, you want to be a professional skydiver). Career advancement doesn’t come by just wishing for it. Finding a life-partner doesn’t just happen by sitting at home reading romance novels (unless you order them online and the delivery-person happens to be “the one”)!

But once we’ve taken the action we need to, there’s that time when things can’t be rushed, pushed, prodded, or over-acted upon. That time when we have to sit and wait because doing something will actually mess things up.

A client brought this truth to mind when he told me about a smoke-griller he’d bought and just used to make smoked pork-butt for his family for Mother’s Day. Here’s the bottom line (pun always intended):

That pork butt had to smoke for 8 hours, with almost no action on his part. Unlike other grills that we have to watch over, poke, and turn the meat frequently, with this “smoker”, all he had to do was put the pork on, leave it sit, wrap it after 4 hours, and leave it sit again another 4 hours!

Not only did he not need to touch it, it was better not to. For that meat to cook properly to optimum condition and taste, he had to let it rest. He couldn’t even open the smoker to check it, because too much draft dries out the meat and cools down the cooking.

In other words, if he had kept checking it, it would have damaged the pork butt, due to air getting in and a fluctuation in temperature. Plus, it causes stains and greasiness to the smoker itself, making it more difficult to work with the next time.

How this translates to life and leadership: Expert leaders know when to leave a project “sit” in the hands of those they’ve assigned it to. No need for continuous checking or touching.

How, then, do we as leaders, hold our followers accountable and help them when they need it? Unlike cooking meat in smokers, we can’t just leave things “sit” until time’s up (the deadline for deliverables). They don’t always know exactly what to do or how to do it. Or they may be too lackadaisical in getting it done, making it a lower priority than necessary.

Here’s where discernment comes in. When we empower someone with an assignment or project, there’s a secret to finding the right balance between too “hands off” and micromanaging. It’s this:

It depends.

On…

  • Our assignee’s personality—are they self-motivated and prefer independence, or do they need external motivation and prefer more guidance? Also, how likely are they to ask for help when they need it? Some people get defensive and annoyed with what they consider “looking over their shoulder”. Others want and need someone to check in on how they’re doing as well as offer help. Especially if they’re too shy to ask. (1 Cor. 9:19-23)
  • Our assignee’s level of expertise—how familiar and skilled are they with whatever they need to know and do to produce the best outcome? The amount of training and instruction they need will determine the amount of autonomy we can give them.
  • Competing priorities—What else do they have “on their plate” and who else is asking them to complete projects/assignments? The level of urgency and level of our position in relation to other “asks” and “askers” (assignments and stakeholders) will determine many gentle reminders they need. Nagging never works, due to the pushback and avoidance, but well-placed check-ins and reminders do. For example, “I haven’t heard from you in (amount of time). Is there something you need help with?” Or “How can I help you…?”

How do we know when we’re micromanaging?

  • Followers become passive—they stop taking initiative for fear of getting something wrong and getting in trouble.
  • Followers become passive-aggressive—they obey on the outside but find sneaky ways to get away with doing things their own way. Or they purposely stall until the last minute. Or they gossip and bad-mouth the person who’s “on their back all the time”.
  • Followers get lazy— why put forth effort when the boss/leader is going to change or reject whatever they do anyway?
  • Followers push back— rarer but depending on their personality and leader’s level of authority, the assignee may express anger toward whoever doesn’t respect or trust them enough to give them more autonomy.
  • Followers stop following—they leave—the team, group, organization, or company.

All these cases produce the same end result—an inferior product, failure, and relational conflict (hidden or expressed). The follower, like the meat smoker, becomes harder to work with.

Find the balance. Watch for warning signs of micro-managing. Offer help and provide check-ins at a cadence that’s mutually agreed upon and beneficial both ways. Meanwhile, until the “timer goes off”, leaders, exercise the self-control necessary to not control whoever we’ve delegated something to. (Ex. 18:13-26)

Where do we need to keep our hands off and just trust the process and/or empower the person? Sometimes the best action is inaction.