"Doing nothing" seems to be beneficial to all parties involved. If that is true, then why are so many managers not "doing nothing?" There are four main excuses that managers have for not "doing nothing." Let’s look at the excuses and explain why each of these excuses doesn’t hold much logic.
"Don’t Have the Time." Many managers say they just do not have the time to develop, listen to, give feedback to, or motivate their staff. They are too busy doing. They believe they would never be able to get everything done if they had to spend time managing and leading. They pretty much leave their team alone, step in when there are problems or emergencies, and hope for the best.
The Counter-Argument: It is true that managing and leading take a lot of time. In reality, they should take most of a manager’s time. But the more managers manage and lead, the more time they will have in the future because their team members will be able to do more and more on their own and take over much of the work that the manager currently has to do herself.
Omnipotence. Some managers hold the perception that they can do their assignments better and faster than any employee ever could. This perception is reinforced when they are told that this is the reason they got the managerial job in the first place.
The Counter-Argument: These managers may be right in their belief that they can currently perform a job better than anyone else. But if they try to do everything themselves, they will eventually burn out and turn into drowning workaholics. Many managers are guilty of omnipotence. They feel that they are the only ones who can do things well. This is a fallacy. There is probably someone out there who, with some training and direction, can do a task as well, maybe even better. If a manager believes she is the only one who can do something so well, then she will become the only one doing it. And eventually, if she doesn’t trust others enough to try to teach them how to do a task better, she will be the one doing everything.
Overloading. Many accidental managers know that their employees are already too busy. They do not want to overload them even more by offloading additional work to them.
The Counter-Argument: This is a very powerful concern. However, if the manager had more time to manage and lead, he could reexamine his employees’ priorities and how they use their time, and then train and develop them so they could do more by working differently. Many managers also make the false assumption that they can only "do nothing" if they have employees who are performing at the highest levels. The more competent employee, who has demonstrated dependable performance over time, is obviously the best candidate for delegating work to. But managers must be careful not to select these individuals too often or exclusively because that will end up overburdening a few people. In addition, others may interpret this as favoritism. Keep in mind that you can exert management/leadership behavior by developing your less competent employees, making them more competent so they can assume more responsibilities. It is even possible to get your problem or difficult employees to take on more responsibility. These individuals may be bored, frustrated, or seeking attention. Greater challenges or additional responsibilities may cause them to change their outlook and improve their performance.
Company Culture. It is the philosophy and practice in many companies that each person, even a manager, has individual assignments for which that person is solely responsible. Additionally, many companies and senior managers do not believe in, or are not educated about, the "do nothing" approach.
The Counter-Argument: This is probably the strongest reason for not "doing nothing." However, it is up to you, as a manager, to convince upper management how the department or organization will benefit from the "do nothing" approach (although clearly it would be beneficial if upper management recognized this on its own). Many successful managers have told me that when they put their argument for doing nothing into business terms (e.g., increased productivity and profits, higher morale), their management listened and allowed them to try the "do nothing" philosophy.