The Influence of Micromanagement on Employee Performance and Well-Being: A Systematic Literature Review

Abstract

Aims: The aim of this research paper is to systematically review and synthesize empirical studies published from 2020 onward to clarify how micromanagement influences employee performance and well-being, particularly in comparison to autonomy-supportive leadership. The study seeks to identify the psychological and organizational outcomes of micromanagement across diverse contexts, highlight inconsistencies or gaps in the existing literature, and provide actionable insights to inform leadership practices and organizational policies that enhance employee motivation, engagement, and overall effectiveness. Study Design: This study uses a qualitative approach, primarily relying on a literature review for its methodology. Place and Duration of Study: The study was conducted in Bacolod City, Philippines from February 2025-June 2025. Methodology: A comprehensive search was conducted across multiple electronic databases including Google Scholar, PubMed, and business management-specific databases. A thematic synthesis approach was employed to identify recurring patterns and contrasting findings. Contextual factors and study limitations were also considered to provide a comprehensive understanding of micromanagement’s impact. Results: Micromanagement has been widely documented to negatively impact employee well-being and performance by undermining autonomy, reducing job satisfaction, and increasing stress and turnover rates. Excessive control, according to studies, limits both creativity and motivation while promoting mistrust and disengagement across various industries and cultures. However, emerging evidence suggests that in specific settings—such as high-pressure, process-driven environments or among less experienced employees—micromanagement can enhance performance by providing necessary structure and boosting self-efficacy. These findings highlight the importance of adaptive leadership that balances control with autonomy, tailoring oversight to employee needs and situational demands to optimize motivation, engagement, and organizational effectiveness. Conclusion: This review concludes that micromanagement generally harms employee motivation, well-being, and performance across diverse contexts. While it may benefit novices or high-risk tasks, habitual micromanagement is counterproductive. Organizations should promote adaptive, autonomy-supportive leadership to optimize performance and sustain employee psychological health.