“First, do no harm” — Hippocratic Oath
In a world where hustle culture dominates, the idea that doing nothing can be a powerful management strategy might seem counterintuitive. Yet, some of the best leaders know that sometimes, the most impactful action is… inaction.
There’s a prevailing belief out there that effective leaders should be constantly in motion — always acting, always deciding, and most importantly, always intervening.
This mindset comes from the misguided idea that a manager’s value is directly correlated to their level of activity. After all, it’s how most companies evaluate their managers during a promotion cycle.
However, a less celebrated but equally crucial aspect of effective management is the art of simply doing nothing.
Let me share a quick story to illustrate this point.
When Less is More
Once upon a time, there were two engineers on my team — let’s call them Alice and Bob. Alice was super proactive; every time she discovered something that could be improved, she’d either write a backlog ticket, or, if the work was fast enough, do it right then and there.
Alice, one day, shipped something that looked like a harmless fix — it wasn’t, and that didn’t make Bob very happy. You see, Bob was already working on something very similar, so now their work conflicted.
God, I heard some venting from Bob that day. He was pissed. And, after our 1:1, I had three options:
Reach out to Alice and give her some feedback
Create a new Process™ to avoid similar events from repeating
Do nothing
I really thought about giving some feedback to Alice that day, but here’s the thing: 1. this was an honest mistake, 2. that never happened before, and most importantly, 3. I really didn’t want to kill her proactivity.
And creating a new process, seemed even worse; it would probably decrease everyone’s developer experience just to (maybe?) prevent a rare issue.
So I did nothing*; Alice kept being proactive and we’ve never experienced this issue again on the team. Yay!
(*) I actually did something: I explained to Bob why I wasn’t going to give feedback to Alice nor create a new process.
After reading this, some of you are probably thinking “But you could have at least (…)”. No, just stop it. We humans (yes, managers are humans — surprising, I know!) have this natural tendency of intervening, of doing things, of acting; even when Nature, more often than not, will figure things out for us.
Don’t get me wrong, sometimes we actually should intervene — we are paid to fix things when they’re broken, after all.
But, more often than not our actions can backfire. In other words, by assuming that taking action always leads to positive outcomes, we risk creating new problems for our team — think of iatrogenesis (when the cure is worse than the disease).
Let me explain.
Busy doesn’t mean Productive
In many companies, it’s implied that action is productivity. Managers, at these places, feel the pressure to make decisions quickly — and the more the better! They’re also nudged into providing constant feedback and to be seen as proactive problem-solvers.
You’re probably thinking, “Well, these things seem good, no?”, which I’d agree that to some extent they are! But, there is a downside to perpetual manager action. Just a couple of examples:
A bottleneck called You: One of the most important aspects of effective management is trust. By stepping back and allowing your team to handle tasks and solve problems on their own, you promote a sense of ownership. When a manager intervenes too often, it can undermine the team’s confidence and creates a bottleneck — you.
Decision fatigue: The quality of your decisions can decline after an extended period of overwhelming decision-making. By choosing to do nothing in certain situations, managers can conserve their mental energy for the decisions that truly matter; when action is necessary, it is well-considered and impactful.
Action and Inaction
Of course, doing nothing is not a one-size-fits-all solution — I must say I’d love to have that job, though 😀. Effective management requires a balance between action and inaction.
The key is to (try to) recognize the situations where intervention is necessary and where it is not. Some tips for finding that balance:
Assess the situation: Before taking action, assess whether the issue at hand requires immediate intervention or if it can be resolved by the team. Sometimes, problems have a way of resolving themselves when given time.
Set clear expectations: Ensure that your team understands their roles and responsibilities. When expectations are clear, team members are more likely to take initiative and address issues independently — you’d be surprised, actually!
Encourage autonomy: Create an environment where team members feel empowered to make decisions and take ownership of their work. Provide guidance and support, but resist the urge to micromanage.