I would say, suit it to the person you're managing.
me I just trained my reports to use their judgement where appropriate, and bring things to my attention when it looked like it was going to be a problem that needed to be addressed long-term (and was above their paygrade/resources).
for exceptional workers (blessed with danger sense, good judgement, aptitude), they had full autonomy (fill me in on your touch points but otherwise, handle your business).
you could think of it as an "evented" style of management. with direct monitoring as the core. I've always been a fan of go and see; relative to wait and read report.
to be frank, when it was just about the work, things went swimmingly. I made sure the right people had the right styles of work (worked to their strengths) and never assigned work to someone who wasn't capable of it. most importantly, I always took into account a persons limitations (physical, social, mental, personal).
day-to-day stuff they manage their own time.
... plus a 5 minute discuss/debrief on long-running projects works well with capable workers.
same with the general group dynamics (unless there is an objective problem, I let them run their own thing). and yes, that meant sometimes they had disagreements; but as long as they were adult about it, they usually sorted it out on their own.
--
same way I run my direct reports up the chain to my bosses, btw.
I tend to alter the corporate culture under my "umbrella" of responsibility.
me I just trained my reports to use their judgement where appropriate, and bring things to my attention when it looked like it was going to be a problem that needed to be addressed long-term (and was above their paygrade/resources).
for exceptional workers (blessed with danger sense, good judgement, aptitude), they had full autonomy (fill me in on your touch points but otherwise, handle your business).
you could think of it as an "evented" style of management. with direct monitoring as the core. I've always been a fan of go and see; relative to wait and read report.
to be frank, when it was just about the work, things went swimmingly. I made sure the right people had the right styles of work (worked to their strengths) and never assigned work to someone who wasn't capable of it. most importantly, I always took into account a persons limitations (physical, social, mental, personal).
day-to-day stuff they manage their own time.
... plus a 5 minute discuss/debrief on long-running projects works well with capable workers.
same with the general group dynamics (unless there is an objective problem, I let them run their own thing). and yes, that meant sometimes they had disagreements; but as long as they were adult about it, they usually sorted it out on their own.
--
same way I run my direct reports up the chain to my bosses, btw.
I tend to alter the corporate culture under my "umbrella" of responsibility.