Good boss or bad boss—which one have you become? And is your own boss a good one or a bad one? I have categorized the types and summarized how to deal with them.
First, the major classification is divided into three based on the direction of the boss's "arrow of consciousness": External, Self, or Subordinate. A good boss has their arrow pointed toward the subordinate's growth. A problematic boss does not. If it points External, they are absent; if it points to Self, they are self-centered. Self-centeredness is further split into four categories based on which "self" they are trapped by: Past Self, Self-Image, Status, or Current Self.
I have summarized the following for each direction of the arrow:
- Common scenarios and how subordinates should handle them
- Self-diagnosis for the boss themselves
Self-diagnosis is a two-step process: your own actions and the reactions of those around you. The lower the meta-cognition of the type, the less likely they are to notice through their own actions. The mirror is always on the other person's side.
Arrow Points "External" — Lack of Ownership
They don't think management is their job. The arrow points outward. The specific content of "external" varies by type, but the commonality is that the subordinate's growth is not within their scope of responsibility.
This cause alone is difficult to distinguish from "good neglect" (intentional delegation). The test is simple: go ask them something and see if they respond. If they do, it's delegation; if not, they are absent.
1. Neglectful/Indifferent Type
They end things with "Just do it nicely." No 1-on-1s. Even if they exist, they are just for show. When you're in trouble, you can't catch them.
How to handle: Read neglect as freedom and move first. Since you won't get an answer even if you ask, run things with post-approval: "I'm doing this; tell me if it's no good." Lower the hurdle for approval to the limit.
Self-diagnosis:
- [Action] When was the last time you had a meaningful 1-on-1 with a subordinate?
- [Reaction] Are subordinates bypassing you for consultations? Are reports only shared after the fact?
2. The Dumper Type
Indifferent when handing things over. The moment the work comes back, they turn into an evaluator. For this type, "handing over" equals "letting go."
How to handle: The moment work is handed to you, nail down the goal and the scope of judgment. Ask beforehand, "Is this format okay? How much can I decide on my own?" Push back against later orders with, "Based on the criteria we discussed at the start..."
Self-diagnosis:
- [Action] When handing over work, do you verbalize the goal and the scope of what you're entrusting?
- [Reaction] Are subordinates excessively checking in on work you've handed them? That's a sign they fear later changes.
3. Exhausted Player Type
No ill intent. They are moving too much themselves and can't keep up. Their catchphrase is "I want to see it, but I don't have time." Despite good intentions, the result is the same as neglect. Excellent players often fall into this.
How to handle: Minimize the time you take from them. Create touchpoints with "just 5 minutes." Long consultations won't pass, so bring only the essentials. Don't corner them; solve it through scheduling.
Self-diagnosis:
- [Action] What is the ratio of player work to time spent looking after subordinates? Are you doing management only in your spare time?
- [Reaction] Are subordinates holding back because you "look busy"? Your busyness is becoming a wall for consultation.
4. The Critic Type
Their points are accurate. They can say "you should do it more like this." But they don't move themselves. Sharp in meetings, but execution is left to subordinates.
How to handle: Use their logical arguments as a resource. Draw out their points, handle the implementation yourself, and return the results with "It's thanks to your advice." Don't blame them for not moving; use them as a brain.
Self-diagnosis:
- [Action] Which is higher: the number of points you've made or the number of times you've actually worked?
- [Reaction] Are subordinates accepting your points without counter-arguments or consultation? That's a sign they've learned you won't move anyway.
Next to the outward-pointing boss is the boss whose arrow returns inward. First, to their past self.
Arrow Points to "Past Self" — Obsession with Own Methods
Their own success stories have become the standard. The arrow points to their past self. The tricky part is that the person themselves hasn't verbalized why they were able to do it. Success without reproducibility cannot be translated for subordinates. A great player is not necessarily a great coach. Moreover, they may not even have ill intent. That is the most troublesome part.
5. Watch My Back Type
"This is normal," "I did more in the past." The only basis for their standards is their own experience.
How to handle: Instead of the standard itself, draw out a breakdown of the standard. "In what order did you arrive there?" Since they haven't verbalized it themselves, solving it together brings the standard down to a realistic level of granularity.
Self-diagnosis:
- [Action] Can you explain the standards you demand in words other than your own experience? Do you settle for "normal" or "obvious"?
- [Reaction] Are subordinates talking about your standards as an "insurmountable wall" rather than a "goal"?
6. Micromanagement Type
They specify even the procedures. They cannot tolerate anything other than their own way. They want to check progress repeatedly.
How to handle: Anticipate and show them the process midway. If left alone, they will intervene out of anxiety, so frequent sharing actually eliminates the gaps for intervention. Give them information before they butt in. Create freedom by anticipating with reports.
Self-diagnosis:
- [Action] When a method differs from your own, do you speak up without waiting for the result? Are you evaluating the process or the output?
- [Reaction] Are subordinates checking every single thing before deciding? That's a sign they've stopped self-driving.
7. Pressure/Fear Type
They grill you if you can't do it. Constant "Why can't you do it?" They move people through fear but don't show an alternative path.
How to handle: Translate the grilling as a "gap in expectations" rather than a denial of personality. Pick up the facts and let the emotional pressure slide. Keep records. If the irrationality continues, distance is also a strategy.
Self-diagnosis:
- [Action] Are you looking for "why it can't be done" together, or just cornering them? Do you show the next step after grilling them?
- [Reaction] Are subordinates hiding bad information? If you move people with fear, bad news won't come up. And a boss starved of information will grill them even more.
Next to the boss obsessed with their past self is the boss who misperceives their current self.
Arrow Points to "Self-Image" — Lack of Objectivity
The arrow points to a self-image of "I am right" or "I am doing well." They aren't looking at the subordinate in front of them, but at their ideal self. Indifference and over-eagerness, which seem opposite, grow from the same root. In both cases, they can't see themselves.
8. The Naked King Type
They are convinced they are excellent. They don't listen to people until the end. They are defensive against criticism. Meetings are solo performances. Everyone around them stays silent, and their "nakedness" is fixed.
How to handle: Don't try to win an argument head-on. It only hardens their defense. Take a "please teach me" stance and hide insights within questions. Pass proposals in a way that makes them look like their own achievement. If it's too draining, designing distance is also a strategy.
Self-diagnosis:
- [Action] In your most recent meeting, who spoke longer: you or your subordinates? Can you listen to criticism until the end?
- [Reaction] When you start talking, do counter-arguments disappear? Has "That's amazing" increased? The increase in yes-men isn't because you've become right; it's because the cost of voicing an opinion has become too high.
9. The Over-eager/Ineffective Type
Their motivation is real. They read management books and launch measures one after another. Yet subordinates are tired, and their "good intentions" don't land. This is because they are looking at the "correct model" rather than the person.
How to handle: Have them verbalize the aim: "What do you want to solve?" Since their effort is real, don't deny it; just redirect it. "If that's the aim, this would be more effective." Nail down the problem setting together, not just the measures.
Self-diagnosis:
- [Action] Are you measuring the effectiveness of the measures you've launched? Has "implementing it" become the goal?
- [Reaction] Is the subordinates' reaction to new initiatives thin? Is there an air of "here we go again"?
Up to this point, the obsession was internal. Only the next type is concerned with the outside.
Arrow Points to "Status" — Self-Preservation/Approval
The arrow points to their own position. While other self-centered types are inward-looking, this type looks at the eyes of those above and the evaluation of those around them. Subordinates become a means to protect their status.
10. The Flounder Type
They only look up. A flounder's eyes are on the top of its head. Credit is theirs; responsibility is the subordinate's. They have a smooth face for those above and a different face for those below. They suck up the subordinate's achievements as their own.
How to handle: Keep records of achievements. Visualize contributions in minutes, chats, and emails. If it's only verbal, it will be sucked up. Intentionally create situations where you are directly visible to those above. Protect yourself with systems rather than resentment.
Self-diagnosis:
- [Action] When conveying a subordinate's achievement to those above, do you specify who did it? Do you take responsibility for failures or pass them on?
- [Reaction] Are subordinates trying to connect with those above without going through you? That's a sign they've judged that you won't protect them.
11. The Too-Nice Type
They don't want to be disliked, so they become soft. They don't say tough things. Evaluations are also on the soft side. It looks like kindness, but it robs people of growth opportunities.
How to handle: Go get tough feedback yourself. Draw it out in an easy-to-say way: "Please tell me just one thing I should fix." Don't take soft evaluations at face value; measure yourself by external standards. Don't settle for comfort.
Self-diagnosis:
- [Action] Have you made even one painful point in the last month? Are you making evaluations soft because you don't want to be disliked?
- [Reaction] Do subordinates feel there is "nothing to gain" from your words? Being kind but not relied upon is the quietest failure.
The final cause is the boss whose arrow's direction itself is not fixed.
Arrow Points to "Current Self" — Lack of Consistency
The standard is not outside (goals or subordinate growth) but within themselves at that moment. That's why what they say changes depending on the day or the situation. The person themselves intends to be consistent because they are serious each time. They aren't wavering; they are being reset every time.
12. Emotional Weather Type
Their attitude, evaluation, and instructions change with their mood. Those around them check today's weather. They have no ill intent.
How to handle: Have a weather forecast. Save important talks for sunny days. To prevent "he said, she said," keep records. Don't take the waves as an evaluation of yourself.
Self-diagnosis:
- [Action] Do you have different reactions to the same report depending on the day? Do you bring your mood into your attitude?
- [Reaction] Do subordinates preface things with "Is now okay?" Are they timing their approach?
13. Whimsical Pivot Type
They don't waver with emotion, but with ideas. Every time they encounter a book, seminar, or another company's example, the policy changes. What they say this week is different from last week.
How to handle: Clearly show past decisions and send them back. "We decided this last time; are we changing it?" The person themselves has forgotten the previous instruction. Don't follow everything; only move on confirmed policies.
Self-diagnosis:
- [Action] Do you still remember the policy you issued last month? Do you explain the reason every time you change it?
- [Reaction] Even when you give an instruction, do subordinates not move immediately and wait to see? That's a sign they've learned it will change anyway.
Bosses Who Point to "Subordinates" — Even Good Bosses Need Handling
This is the reverse of everything so far. The arrow points to the subordinate's growth.
However, even good bosses need handling. If you let your guard down, you'll become dependent. The better the boss, the more comfortable it is, and that comfort hides the dependency. You can run fast on the rails laid by a good boss. But on the day the rails disappear, you won't be able to run.
The principle is one: use support for brainstorming, not for answers. Consult after having a hypothesis, steal the "reasoning" behind their judgment, and create standards within yourself. Intentionally leave areas for you to decide on your own.
14. Quality Leader Type
They clearly show expectations. They have a balance of toughness and support. They entrust, but they are watching. Feedback is specific.
How to use: Don't accept support as an answer. Consult after having a hypothesis. Steal the "reasoning" of this boss's judgment and transplant it into your own standards. Time under this person is a period to take home a model.
Complacency check:
- [Action] Have you recently changed how you involve yourself depending on the subordinate? If you treat everyone the same, it's a sign of returning to a fixed model (obsession).
- [Reaction] Do subordinates bring bad reports and opposing opinions? The speed of bad news is proof of a good boss. If that slows down, you're starting to slide into the King type.
15. Coaching Partner Type
They don't give answers; they return questions. They make the subordinate think for themselves and walk alongside them.
How to use: Don't be lazy with the questions. When a question is returned, view it as training to think things through on the spot. Walking alongside will end someday. Get into the habit of questioning yourself now.
Complacency check:
- [Action] Is returning a question actually supporting them to think? Has it become an escape to avoid giving an answer?
- [Reaction] Do subordinates feel a response to the questions, or are they starting to feel neglected?
16. Intentional Delegator Type
They intentionally entrust and encourage self-driving. They don't butt in, but they can be caught at key points. It looks like neglect, but they are watching.
How to use: Don't fill the entrusted freedom with a desire for approval. Don't go seeking praise. Design the grip on key points yourself. Steal this boss's line of "what to entrust and what to grip."
Complacency check:
- [Action] Do you grasp the key points of the work you've entrusted? Has delegation been replaced by indifference (Absent type)?
- [Reaction] Do subordinates feel the entrusted work is freedom or neglect? This is the dividing line between delegation and absence.
Conclusion — Use Them, But Don't Lean on Them
A problematic boss is not just luck. If you know where the arrow is pointing, there are moves you can make. For the outward-pointing boss, anticipate. For the boss trapped in the past, break down the standards. For the boss trapped in their self-image, ask questions. For the boss concerned with status, visualize. For the wavering boss, keep records.
And even with a good boss, the moment you lean on them, your arrow points to the boss instead of the work. Looking up becomes the goal, and approval becomes the goal. That is the same structure as the problematic bosses we've seen in this article.
So, don't distance yourself from your boss. Rather, it's the opposite. You should use the function of a "boss" to the fullest. Draw out everything you can—judgment, experience, and network. Using them is different from leaning on them. Using them means moving the boss while keeping your arrow pointed at your own work. Leaning on them means pointing your arrow at the boss and stopping your own decision-making.
You can't redraw the "Boss Gacha." But you can use both the hits and the misses to the fullest.
I have summarized how to conquer your boss on note. After learning your boss's type, please proceed further with the conquest.
note: The Encyclopedia of Boss Conquest - How Aces Use Their Bosses
I've started sharing collections of tips for business people like this, so please follow me!
