Appreciate, Don’t Dictate: How Trust Transforms Teams

Less is Sometimes More When Leading Your Team

Image by Helena Lopes from Unsplash

Today I’m teaming up with my dear Substack friend, Mack. He’s a seasoned digital marketer who’s spent years focused on what makes customers stick around, and what makes them walk away. He’s got a deep appreciation for community, and it shows in the way he thinks about connection, loyalty, and the stories brands tell.

If you’re not subscribing to him, you’re missing out. Today he is writing a piece on leadership. So, without further ado, let’s get to it 👇

---

A hallmark of good leadership is appreciating your workers, it’s why Bette is always talking about its importance. In fact, I would argue that the best way to motivate your workers is to appreciate them. Appreciation means different things to different workers. But we all know if our employer appreciates us or not.

And that affects our productivity. It just does. Gallup did a survey and found that ‘disengaged’ workers accounted for roughly 77% of the workforce, and this led to a loss of $8.9 TRILLION in the global economy.

What happens when you ask your boss if you can leave 2 hours early tomorrow to pick your son up from soccer practice? Do they complain or refuse? Do they agree as long as you have PTO left? Or do they tell you no problem and they’ll cover it?

Each response communicates how the boss perceives your value to the company. If the boss communicates appreciation, it not only increases your productivity, it makes you want to communicate your appreciation back to your boss. If the boss hassles you or refuses this minor request, it communicates that they don’t value you. If it continues, it will likely motivate you to look for another employer who will.

Micromanagement is a Productivity Killer

The previously mentioned Gallup research also points to how micromanagement stifles employee engagement and productivity. As an introvert (INTJ, to be precise), I can verify how irritating micromanagement is. To me, it’s basically a sign that the employer doesn’t trust me. And it’s even worse when the micromanagement is totally unnecessary and is actually getting in the way of my performing my tasks.

During college, I worked night shift at a warehouse. Night shift was usually a skeleton crew of about 5 people. But as seasonal orders spiked there would occasionally be a need to have about 30-50 workers on night shift filling orders as well.

When this happened, I was repeatedly called on to be temporary shift supervisor for the new workers. And these workers always, without fail, outperformed their day shift counterparts. There were several reasons for this, but one of the key ones was that I refused to micromanage the workers.

---

---

When they started working, I would give them a few days of rotating through multiple tasks. Then I would pull them aside individually and ask them which task they preferred. When at all possible, I would make their full-time task be the ones they had selected. It wasn’t always possible, but it was possible to always talk to each worker and give them input into their own workflow. There was no micromanagement, I didn’t look over their shoulders. The idea was to put them in a position where they needed LESS supervision, because workers with less supervision tend to be more productive.

I would track production and see which workers were the best at each task. Then I would have those workers train new workers. After a few days, I would check back in with these workers and ask their opinions on the workers they had trained. Who was performing well, who needed some more help, who needed to be moved.

For reference, this approach was the complete opposite of how day shift was run. On day shift, up to 5 different managers/supervisors could be telling the average worker what to do during the day. That’s a lot of confusion, a lot of potentially conflicting orders, and a lot of micromanagement. I started out with the company under the same system, and I hated it then, so I was determined not to replicate it on night shift.

On night shift, the workers effectively managed themselves as much as possible. I would step in when needed, but as long as the workers proved they could handle their tasks without my input, I was happy to leave them alone. I noticed that the workers would effectively police themselves, they would look out for each other, help get some up to speed, call out the laggards, and basically everyone would get the boat rowing in the same direction.

Less Control Is a Sign of Trust

This is a very simple example from a very average company, of the value of appreciating your workers. The workers were given more responsibility for their own work. As a result, I think they had more respect for me, because I was trusting them to do the work they were assigned with less supervision.

Another benefit was that workers would proactively tell me to keep an eye on this worker or that worker, and how well they were doing. If they continued to progress, I would find a way to elevate their responsibilities and I would make sure they understood that their teammates were the ones that suggested they move up. That way, it wasn’t just their supervisor appreciating their work, it clearly communicated that the entire team was noticing their good work. Which meant that newly elevated worker would be more invested in helping the team as a whole succeed.

At the end of the day, yes, the supervisor needs to manage his workers. But part of that management, perhaps the most important part, is getting out of the way and letting the workers do their work. Too many managers want to set out a rigid path for workers, then walk along side them the entire way to make sure they don’t ‘mess up’.

Smart managers set their workers up for success, then get out of their way and let them be successful. Then when they are, they appreciate the value they bring to their company. Which increases motivation, which increases productivity, and the cycle feeds on itself.

Mack

---

---