Jack Skeels, a former researcher at think-tank RAND, is an Inc. 500 entrepreneur, and CEO of AgencyAgile, where he and his team help organizations rethink how they lead and manage in today’s knowledge-driven workplaces. He has spent his 20+ year career proving that knowledge worker organizations—such as those designing software, innovative and clever products, and complex solutions—operate better when they change their management mindset from command-and-control to one that prioritizes people taking ownership of their work.
His research and hands-on work with hundreds of organizations show that this counterintuitive way of managing leads to 30%+ productivity gains while improving morale.
In his award-winning book, Unmanaged: Master the Magic of Creating Empowered and Happy Organizations, Jack reveals why traditional managerial practices are inadequate today and often backfire. He advocates for a transformative approach: empowering employees to maximize their own productivity. By challenging outdated managerial norms, Jack’s Unmanaged approach equips leaders to create workplaces that boost autonomy, innovation, and results.
What inspired you to develop the concept of “Unmanaging,” and how does it differ from traditional management styles?
When I landed my first real job after college, I couldn’t figure out what exactly do managers do? I had a strong background in cutting-edge computer robotics, and the managers had learned on the job rather than through formal training. They didn’t seem to know as much as me, and didn’t seem to add much to my work. How were they helping me? Instead of guiding me, they often felt like an obstacle—or, at best, an unnecessary layer between me and getting things done.
It didn’t take long before I was expected to become a manager. But, I didn’t want to lead the way I had been led. I started experimenting with this idea of how little managing I could do as a manager while still being effective. I called it, in my head, being a Lazy Manager—but in a good way. It was very effective. The less I micromanaged, the better things went. Yet, I didn’t really know if this was a personal style or a broader principle others could embrace.
It was only after several years as a management sciences researcher that I realized that it was a truly new way to do things, something I now call Unmanaging. Unlike traditional management styles, which all assume that managing is good and therefore more managing equals better results, Unmanaging starts with a different premise: What if the best management is knowing when to step back? Instead of focusing on what a manager must do, this management style asks What should a manager not do?
By removing unnecessary interference and empowering people to manage themselves, Unmanaging challenges long-held assumptions about leadership. And as I’ve learned, sometimes doing less as a manager can lead to much more—for everyone involved.
Can you explain the core principles of “Unmanaging” and why business leaders and managers should care?
If you’re a manager, start by asking yourself a simple but crucial question: How do I measure my success as a manager?
Managers are expensive—often the highest labor cost in an organization. Yet, many managers don’t produce much compared to their teams. In fact, management itself can act as a tax on productivity. I call this “The Manager Tax”—the hidden cost of unnecessary oversight.
The more managers an organization has, the more managerial activity takes place. Here’s the problem: managerial activity and productivity have an inverse correlation. The more managing happens, the less productive the team becomes. That may seem counterintuitive so let’s break it down with a simple example:
- A manager oversees a team of eight workers, who work all day to produce 200 units per week. Meanwhile, the manager, with no direct tasks, sits in their office doing nothing and feeling useless. But the workers are fully productive.
- Seeking to contribute, the manager decides to introduce a daily one-hour meeting to “check in” on progress or discuss whatever. Managers are very good at creating meetings that do nothing to improve productivity.
- Now each worker loses five hours a week to meetings—time they previously spent getting things done. As a result, their output drops to 175 units per week.
The organization just paid that manager good money to reduce productivity. That’s not a very good investment.
Over the last 20 years, working with over 200 small and medium-sized businesses, we’ve proven that Unmanaging techniques—which prioritize autonomy over interference—actually boost worker productivity, quality, and happiness. The best way to measure a manager’s effectiveness isn’t by how much they do—but by how much productivity they enable in their workers.
How does “Unmanaging” address common challenges in modern workplaces, such as burnout, low engagement, or high turnover?
Those are often symptoms of over managing—a workplace stressed and weighed down by excessive oversight, unnecessary meetings, and rigid structures that stifle autonomy. One thing is clear: when employees feel controlled rather than empowered, job satisfaction plummets.
This is where Unmanaging comes in. By shifting from a command-and-control mindset to one that prioritizes worker self-management, we create an environment where people take ownership of their work, feel more engaged, and experience greater reward and fulfillment.
One of our clients, a 40-person consultancy, saw firsthand how Unmanaging transformed their workplace. While some employees still moved on—no workplace retains everyone forever—their departures looked different. Instead of leaving out of frustration or burnout, they left for exciting personal growth opportunities: traveling the world, going back to school to learn new skills, or pursuing long-held dreams. Some even came back years later because they missed working in such a great workplace.
The takeaway? When employees have more control over their work, they’re happier, more engaged, and more likely to stay—or return. Unmanaging doesn’t just reduce turnover; it creates a workplace people actually want to be part of.
How can leaders and managers tell if their organization is overmanaged?
Some leaders instinctively know their organization has too much management. But for those unsure, there are clear signs that overmanagement is dragging down productivity, engagement, and growth. Here’s how to spot it:
- Count the Managers. One simple measure to diagnose overmanagement is to look at your Manager-to-Worker ratio. In many organizations, as the business becomes more complex or grows, the number of managers expands faster than the organization itself. Leaders often believe that more managers = more control = better results—but in reality, it creates The Manager Tax, a hidden cost that slows everything down. I sometimes call it The Shark— once it starts growing, you can’t out-swim it.
- Read the calendars. Meetings are one of the biggest drains on productivity. Take a close look at how much time employees spend in meetings versus actually working. Our meeting analysis examines:
- “Productive flow” time—how many uninterrupted hours workers have to focus
- Vertical (manager-driven) meetings, which are often more costly to productivity
- Horizontal (peer-based) meetings, which tend to be more supportive and enhance productivity
If calendars are packed with top-down meetings that don’t add value, it’s a sign that management is getting in the way.
- Ask the Workers (Not the Managers!). Employees almost always know when overmanagement is killing productivity. The best way to find out? Ask them. Where do they feel their time is being wasted? What processes slow them down? We conduct diagnostics with clients to benchmark key issues like communication bottlenecks, inefficient coordination, and excessive complexity. Just don’t ask the managers—they tend to think everything is fine. (Ha!)
- Are your workers optimally developed? An important role of managers is to develop talent—but this doesn’t always mean stepping in. Sometimes, the best thing a manager can do is get out of the way and let employees use their skills and grow. A Deloitte-sponsored study found the best way to see whether that’s happening is to ask each worker how true this statement is: “At work, I have the opportunity to do what I do best every day.”
If the answer isn’t a resounding yes, then your management structure may be limiting potential rather than unlocking it.
If you recognize these signs in your organization, it’s time to rethink how management operates. Unmanaging isn’t about eliminating leadership—it’s about ensuring that managers add value, rather than becoming obstacles to productivity. The less management gets in the way, the more organizations thrive.
What practical steps can managers take to transition from a traditional managerial approach to an “Unmanaging” mindset?
Transitioning from a traditional managerial approach to an Unmanaging mindset isn’t just about adjusting tactics—it’s about changing how you see your role entirely. Until you recognize the ways traditional management hinders productivity, you can’t change. That’s why I wrote my book titled, Unmanaging: Master The Magic of Creating Empowered and Happy Organizations, to help leaders see the problem before they try to fix it.
Once you can see it, the next step is to measure it. Metrics like the Manager-to-Worker ratio, meeting analysis, and employee productivity flow (discussed earlier) provide a starting point for understanding where management is getting in the way.
One of the biggest shifts to recognize is that better productivity is not a managerial function—it’s a group outcome. A manager’s job isn’t to single-handedly drive productivity but to enroll all of the workers in improving it together.
The most effective way to implement this mindset is what I call the “Why” conversation—a structured dialogue that brings the entire team or department into the process of improving productivity. Instead of dictating change from the top down, this approach invites employees to contribute ideas, solve problems, and take ownership of their work. Why not let the people doing the work help make change for the better happen and shape how it’s done?
Another important realization for a manager: Your employees have an incredible amount of potential. Everyone—managers included—is a learning machine. A great manager doesn’t just find good people but creates an environment where everyone has the opportunity to become great.
Here’s a challenge. Tell me how many problem or underperforming workers you have, and I’ll tell you how much you have failed at your job as a manager. A strong leader doesn’t blame their team; they empower them. The more you trust your employees, the more they’ll rise to the occasion.
Are there specific industries or team structures where “Unmanaging” is particularly effective or challenging?
Unmanaging is a proven and better way to run what we call knowledge worker project organizations, which traditionally have included advertising and marketing agencies, software companies, and research and development organizations. We’ve also worked with large, multi-project organizations in the pharmaceutical and automotive industries, and smaller project-centered companies that just want to run faster.
Can you share a real-world example of a company or team that successfully adopted “Unmanaging,” and what were the results?
A few years ago, we worked with a 30-person home electronics installation company—a team of brilliant problem-solvers who could MacGyver any automation into a home. But despite their technical expertise, they had a scheduling nightmare that seemed unmanageable.
Projects were constantly getting delayed, workers were frustrated with scheduling decisions, and the CEO was tearing his hair out. He was ready to hire a project manager just to figure out the weekly schedule—a move that would have added cost without necessarily solving the core issue.
The CEO assumed that a manager was needed to fix the scheduling chaos. But here’s the truth: Scheduling is a complex problem, but it isn’t a managerial one. The workers themselves had the knowledge to solve it—they just needed the opportunity.
Instead of inserting another layer of management, we took the opposite approach by giving the problem back to the team. I helped him design a method where the whole team would work together to make the week’s schedule. The CEO would kick off the meeting, then leave the room and let them figure it out.
Within weeks, the CEO reported a complete shift:
- Schedules dramatically improved—delays decreased, and work became more predictable.
- Worker frustration disappeared and positive attitudes emerged—because they had ownership over the process, they felt empowered instead of dictated to.
- Productivity soared—without management interference, they were more efficient and engaged.
For managers concerned about losing control or accountability, how does “Unmanaging” ensure productivity and alignment with organizational goals?
When I hear managers express concerns about worker accountability, I can’t help but ask: Are you holding yourself accountable first? Many managers do not understand that they are asking their team to be “accountable” and hit their productivity targets—say, producing 200 units a week—despite burdening them with productivity-robbing meetings, excessive oversight, and other bureaucratic managerial behaviors.
Accountability starts with managers. Before worrying about worker accountability, managers should ask themselves:
- Am I developing our people effectively?
- Am I giving them clear guidance and understanding of the work that needs to be done?
- Am I giving employees the time, space and tools to succeed?
For most organizations, the answer is “Not enough.” When we remedy this by shifting the work model, then we see higher productivity, stronger engagement, and better results from workers.
Unmanaging doesn’t mean abandoning leadership—it means restructuring it. This happens through the ACE (Authority-Control-Empowerment) model, which breaks down managerial roles into three key functions:
- Authority: Managers are responsible for effectively communicating the objective truth about what needs to be done.
- Control: Workers are responsible for taking ownership of creating the solution and doing the work, with the support of the manager.
- Empowerment: Managers shift from control to coaching, teaching, and mentoring, ensuring employees grow and continuously develop their skills and confidence.
At the core of Unmanaging is the willingness to “release of control” to workers—a shift that can feel uncomfortable, especially for managers who were once frontline employees themselves. But this is exactly what workers want: more ownership, more trust, and fewer barriers to doing great work.
What advice would you give to managers who want to encourage their organizations to embrace the principles of “Unmanaging?”
If you’re an individual manager looking to introduce the principles of Unmanaging, the good news is you can do this on your own, beginning with your team or department. My book Unmanaging: Master The Magic of Creating Empowered and Happy Organizations provides a solid foundation, as do the books by Jason Fried, particularly Rework, which inspired me. While one manager can make a difference, scaling Unmanaging across an entire organization is quite difficult—especially from the bottom up.
As with any major organizational change, shifting away from traditional management practices is a battle of cultures—the behaviors that are imbedded inside an organization. For Unmanaging to succeed at scale, it requires CEO and leadership team buy-in. Why? Because without top-down support, traditional management mindsets that are wired deeply within us are very difficult to change. Even well-intentioned leaders may struggle to let go of long-standing beliefs. Leaders must be willing to challenge outdated management assumptions and actively reshape how work gets done.
To learn more read Unmanaging: Master The Magic of Creating Empowered and Happy Organizations.
