Micromanaging Reports

 Micromanaging Reports

By OffRoadPilots

Conventional wisdom is that by micromanaging reports submitted to a safety

management system (SMS), their operation becomes a safer place.

Micromanagement is where managers feel the need to control aspects of their

processes and personnel decision-making to an extreme degree, more than what is

necessary or healthy for a usual working relationship. Micromanagement

overcontrolling may take form of a light, medium or high level of overcontrolling,

to an extreme level where a person become obsessed with overcontrolling

processes. Organizations establish rules, both written and unwritten rules, and

acceptable practices, to what, when and who are eligible to submit SMS reports.

These rules are established to manage the probability of reports shared and

shedding an unfavorable

light on the SME enterprise.

However, reports submitted

to the SMS are confidential

reports, and proprietary

property of the organization.

SMS reports are only shared

to a third-party by the AE,

and an SMS manager is not

authorized to share any

reports, audit results, or

operational processes at

their own discretion. The four different levels of micromanagement are Fear of Mistakes, Lack of Trust,

Fear of Stepping Outside the Comfort Zone, and Power Obsession.

Fear of mistakes is a common reason for micromanagement. Managers, and persons with authority resort to micromanagement sine they are afraid that their

team will be making mistakes. They often implement it to avoid potential risks or

downsides to the outcomes. Managers believe that if they do not oversee everything, personnel will not deliver the correct output, with consequences to

follow for managers and other personnel. Mangers fear that if they do not closely

check what their team is doing, they may make severe and costly mistakes that will

put jobs at risk. Micromanagement due to fear is a light level of management.

There are no major issues, and personnel are expecting the managers to tell them

what, when and who about their work tasks. This makes every job tasks easy

without challenges and without a need for performance ambitions. When

conducting a risk analysis of fear of mistakes, the likelihood level is randomly, and

times between intervals are without definite aim, direction, rule, or method, and

their severity level is low, and would attract attention to operational process,

cause operational inconvenience, or unscheduled events. This is a green or yellow

risk level, which is acceptable to most SMS organizations.

Micromanagement is often

the result of a lack of trust in

team members. Lack of trust

is a level of

micromanagement which at

irregular intervals infringes on

a person’s performance

expectations. A person may

be performing a task

satisfactory, but without the

end result in site, a manager is unsure, or has lack of trust, that the remaining portion of the task will be satisfactory. Lack of trust is degrading a person’s

intelligence to a level of being annoying but is not detrimental to personal behavior. The mistrust usually starts from the manager’s assessment of the team’s skill set compared to their own perceived level of skill set. Managers may feel that they need to constantly monitor and control team members to ensure that they work to the manager’s expectations. Managers feel the need to check the work frequency to ensure that everything is running in accordance with their plan, and

according to their instructions. When conducting a risk analysis of lack of trust the

likelihood level is occasionally and times between intervals are inconstant, and their severity level is major, involving an industry standard defined risk, or a risk

significant in size, amount, or degree. This is a blue risk level, which is a pause, and

a decision could go both ways to accept or reject the risk. A root cause analysis is

needed of special cause variations within the blue risk matrix range.

Another primary reason behind managers resorting to micromanagement is fear of

the unknown, or fear of stepping outside of the comfort zone. Fear of stepping

outside of the comfort zone is a high a level of micromanagement, it is detrimental

to operations, production and services, job performance, personal achievement,

and the organizational culture. Managers firmly believe that if they don’t have

tight control over every detail, they might be viewed as incompetent managers, or

that something might go wrong. This negative connotation of the unknown can be

attributed to a lack of their own confidence and abilities. This fear also occurs

when managers are untrained in change management, and due to frequent

changes in the business world, which some managers are unable to navigate.

When conducting a risk analysis of fear of stepping outside of the comfort zone the

likelihood level is frequently, and times between intervals are reliable and

dependable, and their severity level is hazardous, having influence or effect of an

irrevocable harm, damage, or loss. This is an orange risk level, and operators are

required to conduct an investigation, including a system analysis prior to returning

to normal operations.

Power obsession is an extreme level of micromanagement and is where

organizations are totally malfunctioning. There is no guidance, oversight, control,

or integrity within the organization. Managers who are driven by power obsession

tend to be hypercritical and constantly involved in monitoring their team. They

often believe that they know best and that their associates need to be directed

and continuously supervised to achieve the manager’s desired results. Managers

who feel this way often resort to micromanagement to practice their power and

feel like they are making a difference. An organization driven by power obsession

may continue their business as usual, but there is little or no reliability in their

performance. When conducting a risk analysis of power obsession the likelihood

level is systematically, and times between intervals are methodical, planned, anddependable, without defining the operational system or processes involved, and

severity level is catastrophic, where functions, movements, or operations cease to

exist. This is red risk level, and an SMS enterprise is required to cease all operations

until an investigation, including a system analysis is concluded. There are operators

that never recovered from such failures.

The purpose of a safety

management system is to

identify patterns in normal

operations. When the SMS is

micromanaged, or

overcontrolled, patterns

become extinct and can never

be recovered. Without patterns

an SMS enterprise has failed, It

has failed, but not because of

the SMS itself, but because the

SMS is not allowed to paint the true picture of an organization.

Analysing patterns is the most important task to maintain a healthy safety management system. When an SMS is micromanaged, patterns of normal work tasks does not exist and without date it is impossible to establish normal work

practices patterns. It takes a genius to identify who in their organization is micromanaging. The person micromanaging might not be aware of their own micromanagement methods. A

person slowly drifts into micromanagement until it becomes a natural behavior

and other options are not considered. When an accountable executive review their

monthly reports, and when there are no incidents or accidents, and zero hazard

reported, a trap to fall into is to conclude that operations run smoothly, operations

are safe and perform beyond any expectations.

A successful system has established patterns.Micromanagements thrive on ambiguity with a one-way communication line, and often a forceful communication. Micromanagement communication may not be obvious for an outsider to recognize. Only the person affected recognized the hazards of micromanagement. Signs of micromanaging include being told exactly how to do the job down to every detail, having decisions made for you without

consulting your opinion, being frequently second-guessed or criticized for

irrelevant mistakes, being constantly monitored, and having limited autonomy or

decision-making authority. The main drawbacks of micromanagement are that it

prevents creativity and critical thinking, make personnel feel unappreciated or

disrespected, create tension between managers and those they manage, decrease

productivity by wasting time on details that are irrelevant, and increase turnover

as personnel become disillusioned with an overcontrolling atmosphere.

When patterns are missing in

the SMS analysis, performance

indicators are lost. When

performance indicators are

lost, there is no data to assess if

operators are on the

preselected path, and how they

drifted away, or maintaining

their path. When fueling

aircraft, the fuel operator must

have in place a process to test

their fuel for contaminants.

Pilots are also required to test

their fuel in the fuel tank for

contaminants. A glycol-based

fluid was a contaminant in the

fuel, for both supplier and

aircraft operator. Diethylene glycol monomethyl ether is normally added to the jet fuel, but this time a glycol-based fluid was added. The fuel system needs an icing

inhibitor, which is diethylene glycol monomethyl ether. There were unclear

Directional control in a pattern-free system.communication if the fluid was a fuel additive, or a deicing fluid. When unclear

communication is used, such as a trade name, as opposed to naming the fluid,

there is an increased probability for an incident to occur. Where there is one or

more statements suggesting, or enforcing, specific use of terminology, there is

micromanagement. For pilots to be accepted, and to be included in a group of

their fellow peers, they adapt and use the industry accepted language. Personnel

also adapt to micromanaging managers the same way as they adapt to advertising

and promotions. For several days, aircraft flew with deicing fluid as the fuel

additive. Pilots drained their fuel sump and emptied out the contaminants daily.

No SMS report was filed since allowable SMS reports were micromanaged and the

SMS manager was unable to monitor and analyze trends in hazards and incidents.

When the fuel supplier discovered their mistakes, all aircraft flown with deicing

fluid as the fuel additive were grounded, causing a drastic loss of revenue.

When SMS reporting, or any processes are micromanaged, data is not collected for

analysis of normal work practices. Normal work practice for pilots is to drain the

fuel until sump is clean. Pilot were not to examine, or conduct preliminary

assessments of contaminants, but were to discard it and keep flying. The

opportunity to analyse acceptable work patterns were unavailable since no reports

were filed. SMS reports is more than just submitting incident reports, it is crucial

that acceptable work practices reports are submitted for patterns to be detected.

Micromanagement is overcontrolling of processes, which is a hazard in itself.

When overcontrolling takes place, there data is manipulated before all data

becomes available to the SMS manager for analysis. Micromanagement enforces

noncompliance with a regulatory requirement for the accountable executive to be

responsible for operations under the certificate and accountable on behalf of the

certificate holder for meeting the requirements of the regulations.

OffRoadPilots