You think if folks did that on a regular basis, there would have been a noticeable contribution reduction. At that point, it becomes a person management issue and either the situation should be corrected or the person be let go.
And that sounds bad, but there's another argument that gets thrown around: "why should I greatly invest myself in this business, when to the business I'm just a number".
"Being managed" could also be called "outsourcing executive function"--make your manager think about what you're supposed to be doing.
Reserve that executive function for what you love, your escape plan, or whatever.
Oh -- FWIW I didn't mean for "more easily managed" to have some negative implication.
I dunno. On some grander level, I know companies mostly just see us as numbers, but (and perhaps I've been lucky) most of the managers I've had have been basically nice folks, some have even given good career development device (some of which seemed much more beneficial to me than the company).
I guess I view it as something where both parties contribute -- the manager does some managing, people are to some extent independent, it is all about figuring out what mix works. It looks like "being managed" has some negative connotation but I didn't mean to put it there!