There is an opinion that total control promotes efficient work. But comprehensive control is not always justified and gives a positive result. It has its negative sides:
Employee motivation decreases. Is it worth striving for high-quality performance of a task if the boss will still check and, if necessary, correct it? The outcome is predetermined: the quality of work decreases, the employee does not strive for self-development, professional degradation sets in.
The manager's motivation decreases. Monitoring the work of employees and correcting shortcomings takes a lot of time, there is simply no time to perform their main tasks. The outcome is obvious: the quality of work decreases, management skills are lost, professional degradation sets in.
The efficiency of both structural the benefit of using our student database divisions and the company is reduced. The manager focuses primarily on control, rather than directing efforts towards the company's development. Employees, in turn, spend a lot of time participating in control events, instead of working to improve their performance.
Of course, these are far from all the unpleasant moments that can arise due to the fact that control over the work of employees is set to a "very, very high level." This can lead to staff turnover and to a deterioration in the company's production processes.
There may be several reasons for excessive control.
Employees violate the contract
In this case, it is quite logical to start with understanding the reason for the breach of contract. As a rule, all the blame falls on the negligent workers, but not everyone pays attention to the following factors:
The manager violates the contract
Quite often, employees allow themselves to violate the terms of the contract exactly as much as their boss allows himself to. Naturally, we are talking only about conscientious and responsible employees, and not about those who simply shirk work.
Naturally, a leader who doesn’t give a damn will sooner or later see his “reflection” in his subordinates.
Low corporate culture regarding the implementation of agreements
Of course, corporate culture is of great importance for the formation of the company's microclimate. If everything is in order with this issue, then the employee is obliged to warn that he is not able to fulfill some agreement. Is it the same with you? What methods of influence are used in relation to violators?
Sabotage is provoked
Then you need to act strictly according to the plan:
identify “anti-leaders” and “provocateurs”;
guide the employee on the “true path” and explain what the consequences of deviating from the “planned course” may be;
there is no positive dynamics? Then we need to break up.