Harry defended himself by saying that he was following rules he had heard in training. To increase teamwork, bring people together often; review production in your group often so you can keep people on track; and give immediate feedback in public so everyone can learn from one person's mistakes.

But Harry is a micromanager. Instead of making things better, he made them worse. He created frustration and dissension and stifled his staff's initiative.

Sarah, Harry's manager, wanted an investigation of complaints she had heard about him. She had been impressed with Harry's detailed knowledge of what each member of his staff was doing at every minute. She thought he was on top of things.

Observing Harry's behavior substantiated the complaints against him. Harry's staff was knowledgeable and experienced. They knew how to complete their tasks and were eager to take on more responsibility.

But Harry's management style was in their way. He thwarted and frustrated them.

For example, he called everyone together every day for two-hour meetings, though each session became a detailed review of one person's progress the day before. He wasted everyone's time and energy.

Harry questioned every detail of his staff's work in public. He was always angry and nitpicking. Most of his put-downs were personal and about style, not substance. The work he criticized was fine. But Harry always managed to find something wrong with everything, and he pointed it out in a demeaning way.

And Harry often wasted his subordinates' time to save himself a few minutes.

For example, though he knew exactly what he wanted in the template for a new report, he wouldn't spend the few minutes it took to lay it out. He went through repetitive rounds of letting a subordinate develop a template, then offered a few suggestions instead of specifying the changes he wanted. When the employee returned with a guess based on what Harry had said, he'd sarcastically give a few more verbal clues and repeat the process.

When staff fed him back his own words verbatim in letters, he changed them. When they fed him back his new corrections, he changed them again. All the time, he complained about how they never got it right and that he had to do all the work to make sure that things were done properly. At each review, more time was wasted, and tempers rose at the repeated criticism.

The training hadn't changed Harry's style. He'd merely used what he'd heard to reinforce his micromanaging. Harry justified his style by saying he didn't want to dictate to his staff. He wanted to be a good coach and help them learn to be independent.

Actually, he was training them to try to read his mind and to submit to his tongue-lashings. Since almost all his communication was criticism, he also trained them to hate seeing him.

Other results of Harry's micromanaging were that he felt angry and overworked, thought his staff was incompetent and didn't have time to complete his own work.

Micromanagers rarely have enough time for the important tasks. They're too busy managing the minutiae. Of course, good managers make sure important tasks are done right. But micromanagers think everything is a priority. They can't distinguish between what's crucial for them to be doing with their own hands and what's a waste of their time. They're usually nitpicking perfectionists with all-or-none thinking.

Micromanaging usually is driven by narcissism and fear. Harry thought he was the only one who knew how to do things right. He was afraid that if he let others forge ahead, they'd fail and his career would be derailed. Also, he was afraid that if he gave his staff freedom, someone might outshine him.

Micromanaging is also a habit. In general, backing off can be difficult for someone who's worked his way up the ranks. He has to learn when to jump in and when to let staff figure things out.

On the other hand, managers who lack experience in an industry or a core company process have to get involved in understanding the details.

Sarah tried to change Harry by educating him. She pointed out that rules from training are really guidelines. He had to decide when they were appropriate and when they were self-defeating. Also, he had to use different approaches to motivate each member of his staff.

But breaking the micromanaging habit is difficult. Typically, as in Harry's case, understanding when and why he developed the habit didn't change his behavior.

Finally, Sarah had to be direct and use leverage. She pointed out that on most teams there may be one weak link, but for a micromanager, almost everyone is a weak link. Since he said repeatedly that his whole staff, which he had hired and trained, was incompetent, the problem was him. If he didn't change, he'd be the one replaced.

That threat opened Harry to coaching through specific behavioral examples. When he learned to back off appropriately, Sarah also could stop micromanaging him.

Ben Leichtling, a Denver-based speaker, consultant and leadership adviser, can be reached at 303-458-6616 or Ben@LeichtlingAssoc.com.