It’s common knowledge that managers have a strong impact on their employees’ performance and engagement – but many people underestimate the extent of their influence. Gallup reports that a full 70% of employee engagement can be directly linked to managers, while the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) shares research that found managers have a bigger impact than therapists or doctors and as much impact as spouses on employees’ mental health.

Employees know the importance of great management. Billy Doubraski, Vice President in Kimmel & Associates’ Heavy Civil Division, says, “At executive levels, management style is equal to money and benefits in importance – a candidate will ask about management style before asking about money.” In addition to influencing whether a candidate accepts a role with a company, Billy adds, “sometimes a management style can be the lead motivator for a candidate wanting to leave.”

So what kind of management styles have the best results in attracting and retaining top talent – and what style is the most damaging?

Micromanagement is the Most Common Mistake

One of the most common complaints our industry experts hear from candidates is that their supervisors are unwilling to relinquish any control, so the candidate is unable to have any real input on the work they do or the company they work for. And the negative impacts don’t end with current employees: Max Gunther, an Associate in our General Construction Division, explains, “The micromanagement style involves a level of control and constant oversight that can be really detrimental to bringing new employees on board. Providing autonomy and trust to both old and new employees is important.”

There’s not a one-size-fits-all approach to management that will work in every workplace and for every employee. However, there are three successful management styles that we hear about most often:

Hands-On Management

In some ways, hands-on management and micromanagement are similar – but hands-on management is a much more effective way to stay involved with employees without suffocating them. “Hands-on managers are present and aware of what’s going on with their employees,” Billy says. “But these leaders also allow their employees to have input, so it’s a more collaborative approach.” Hands-on managers strike the balance between engaging with their employees and allowing them the autonomy to do their jobs well.

While our clients often report that hands-on management is easier and more effective in person, even leaders in hybrid or remote settings, or those overseeing very large teams, can practice a hands-on management style successfully.

Management by “Walking Around”

Like hands-on management, this “walking around” management style involves actively checking in with employees – but in this case, it works best with in-person workplaces. For example, Billy says, “a company president might fly up to a regional office and walk around the space, talking to employees about their daily goals.” This is appealing because it promotes direct communication between a company’s leaders and employees at every level.

Billy says one “walking around” manager he knows held an office-wide meeting and listened for feedback and ideas from all employees. A junior employee offered a perspective on a challenge the office had been facing that the manager hadn’t thought of – so the manager went with the idea, and it worked. By being present and listening to employees, “walking around” managers can create growth opportunities both for individual employees and their companies as a whole.

Service-Oriented Management

Of all the management styles we hear feedback on, service-oriented management rates the highest. Forbes reports that servant leadership, which emphasizes “listening, empathy, awareness, stewardship, and foresight,” results in higher employee performance and retention than other styles. Service-oriented management affects a company’s internal and external relationships. For example, Billy says, a recent candidate was impressed by a company’s president and owner’s philosophy of management: “They manage from a place of service, always asking employees ‘how can we support you?’ and ‘what can we provide so that you can be successful?’.” That’s a great example of internal service-oriented management.

On the other hand, external service-oriented management focuses on what the company can do for their clients or customers. Jordan Greer, an Associate in Kimmel’s Disaster Restoration Division, says, “I worked with a candidate who said during his second interview, the hiring manager told him the company focused on providing a service for their clients at a critical time in their lives, and leaving things better than they were before. That really resonated with the candidate – that’s the kind of company he wants to work for.”

Those hiring managers showcased their service-oriented management style during the interview process, which is a great way to help candidates feel at ease about joining a new team and confident in their future with the company.

There is no doubt that certain management styles can contribute to a positive organizational culture and long-term employee success by fostering a dynamic and supportive work environment that attracts and retains top talent. When a candidate’s professional needs and goals are supported by a particular management style, they are much more likely to feel satisfied and engaged over the long term.

***We appreciate Billy Doubraski, Jordan Greer, and Max Gunther for contributing their unique perspectives to this article.