Your little brother gets stuck on a level. He tries once, twice, three times. You watch from the couch, getting more and more restless, until you can't take it anymore: "give me the controller, I'll beat it". You beat it on the first try, hand the controller back, and on the next level he gets stuck again.
At work we call that micromanagement: whoever leads controls every detail of the team's work, reviews everything, decides everything and doesn't let anyone move forward without their sign-off. We all know a micromanager. Very few of us admit to being one.
The signs are pretty concrete, in case anyone wants to take the test at home. Asking to be cc'd on everything. Rewriting the email someone else was about to send. Getting to the PR before the team does and leaving thirty style comments. Asking for daily updates on things that don't change daily. Deciding small things anyone on the team could decide perfectly well. And the all-time classic, delegating something and then redoing it "because it was faster".
People stop deciding, because they learn their decision is going to be reviewed anyway. They stop suggesting things, because the idea is going to end up being yours. And they start waiting: for your ok, for your feedback, for you to get back from vacation. You become the bottleneck, you work twice as hard and on top of that you complain the team has no initiative.
It's the little brother who never beats the level on his own, because you never let him stay stuck long enough.
On the other side there's an extreme that's just as harmful, which is confusing autonomy with "everyone figures it out on their own". Disappearing and calling it delegating. That leader doesn't control anything, and isn't there when they're needed either.
I think micromanagement is almost always a symptom of something else. Often what's missing is trust that the other person understands the same thing you do, and that can be fixed: give context. When the team understands what game we're playing, why it matters and what can't be broken, they can make the decisions you would make, even if you're not in the room.
The more context you give, the less control you need.
The other half is harder: accepting that the team solves something in a way you wouldn't have chosen. If the result is good, you don't have to like the path.
Leading is taking responsibility for the team's results, and that doesn't include doing the team's work. Stay close to the what and the why, step back from the how.
So next time you're itching to grab the controller, stay on the couch a little longer and ask him where he got stuck. He might beat it on his own.