Clear Is Kind: Why Setting Expectations Isn't Micromanaging

Logan McKnight
Jan 20
4 min read

I fired my first employee within 90 days of becoming a VP.

Not because he couldn't do the job. Because he'd been set up to fail for years before I got there.

The top brass were ready to let him go before I even started. Here was the problem: no one had ever told him he wasn't meeting expectations. Because no one had ever told him what the expectations were.

They hired him for a stretch role and assumed he'd figure it out. He waited for clear direction since it was outside his scope. That direction never came. So he did what he knew: Covered cases and built relationships with surgeons.

Little by little, the jabs came his way. He was excluded from meetings and discussions, and resentment built on both sides. By the time I stepped in, there was no trust left to rebuild. He was too far gone.

And I became the ax-woman who came in and fired the highest-ranking employee before my 90-day mark. That reputation sent shockwaves through the organization and followed me. It made earning trust with the rest of the team twice as hard.

Brené Brown says it well: Clear is kind. Unclear is unkind.

I'd add this: Unclear doesn't just hurt the person you're avoiding. It hurts whoever has to clean up the mess later.

The Pattern I Keep Seeing

I've spent most of my career working with small, growing med-tech companies and remote teams. The pattern plays out the same way almost every time.

You start with a small, tight-knit team. No written job descriptions or expectations. Little to no formal meeting cadence. A scrappy, "we'll figure it out as we go" attitude. It works... until it doesn't.

When it's time to grow, it's a struggle to integrate new employees - let alone retain them, and scale. New people are frustrated by the lack of clarity. Leadership is disappointed by "culture fit" issues.

It's not a people problem. It's an expectations problem.

The Fear That Keeps Leaders Silent

Here's what I hear from leaders all the time: "I don't want to micromanage."

They want to be "laid back." They want to trust their team. They don't want to be the boss breathing down everyone's neck.

So they say nothing. And silence becomes the expectation.

But here's the thing: setting clear expectations isn't micromanaging.

Micromanaging is telling people how to do every task. Setting expectations is defining the range of what's acceptable and then giving people freedom within those guardrails.

A Simple Framework: Better, Acceptable, Unacceptable

I use a simple framework that's helped me set expectations without becoming a micromanager.

I categorize them as Better Practices, Acceptable Practices, and Unacceptable Practices.

(I say "better" instead of "best" because best assumes things can't improve.)

Better, Acceptable, Unacceptable practices model

Better Practices are your gold standard, what you expect when your team is at their best. This is the "[Your Company Name] Way" that instills culture across departments and leaders.

Acceptable Practices acknowledge that life happens. People have bad days. Things go wrong. This tier isn't where you want someone to live, but it's not a problem unless it becomes a pattern.

Unacceptable Practices are the lines that, when crossed, trigger a conversation. This tier exists so you can address issues early, before resentment builds on either side.

See the difference? You're not dictating every move. You're defining the range and giving people room to operate within it.

Why This Matters More Than You Think

Setting these tiers early does a few things.

First, it creates a shared language. When someone dips below the acceptable line, you can address it without it feeling personal. You're not attacking them—you're pointing to a standard you both agreed to.
Second, it protects your team from resentment. When expectations are clear, people know where they stand. They're not guessing, and neither are you.
Third—and this is the practical reality—it limits your liability. When you inevitably have to let someone go because they aren't meeting the standard, you have documentation. You have a record of the conversations. You've given them every chance to course-correct.

Not everyone is going to be a good fit for your team. That's actually a good thing.

You want high standards. But if you tolerate bad behavior because you never defined what "bad" looks like, you're building a toxic culture by allowing in the wrong people.

The Bottom Line

Clear, consistent communication is kind. Anything less is not.

Silence isn't "being laid back." It's leaving your team to guess and setting up whoever comes after you to clean up the mess.

Save yourself the headache and heartache. Set expectations early and often.

What conversation have you been avoiding that someone else might have to have for you?

Logan McKnight

Logan McKnight is an Executive Advisor and Consultant for med-tech leaders.

With 20 years of experience building teams in neuromonitoring and medical devices, she helps executives lead without burning out and build leadership teams that create impact.