Sometimes a company decides that certain policy decisions should be up to each department, based on need. For instance, a company may have a policy that work starts at 9am, but that if a department needs to have employees start their days at other times, they are able to enforce that other time. In one way, this added power over policy at a department level makes the company more flexible to individual department needs, while also dividing up the power from a centralized Human Resources group to middle managers. This flexibility and division of power can be a wonderful way for middle managers to operate autonomously and to prioritize the best interests of their department.

However, this approach comes with a downside. Leaving some policy decisions to departmental discretion can create inconsistency and risks for unfair treatment. It can also add unnecessary burden to department leadership to figure out what to enforce and how to enforce it. As a middle manager, you get to play the messenger when you enforce agency wide policy. However, when policy decisions are up to your department, you can no longer be the messenger because now the decision comes from you. You have to own that. And while middle managers frequently—and I mean like a dozen times a day—have to make and enforce decisions that fall outside of agency policies, it can feel like an added burden to also take on bigger policy issues. 

So for things that affect a large portion of the staff, like the policy on when a person is eligible for a promotion, or how to go about getting approved to work overtime, universal enforcement of policy is more fair, and removes the burden of decision-making from the middle manager.

What do you think about middle manager decision fatigue? Ever experienced it yourself? Share with us in the comments below.