Category Archives: Organization Structure

Natural Hierarchy

Order out of chaos. What we know and what we don’t know. There are people in the company now. As the mission was discussed, some left, some stayed, some enrolled. Those that are left have to work together, but in what way?

Organizational structure is simply the way we define the working relationships between people. Some of those relationships are vertical. Vertical working relationships are described as managerial and define two things. In that relationship, what is the accountability of each person? In that relationship, who has the authority. Accountability and authority. And, so, a manager is born.

But, who should be the manager? The instant the founder selects a manager, a hierarchy emerges. Some modern companies decry, that because they are modern, they have no managers and thus no hierarchy. Some modern companies believe that hierarchy is an evil social construct that should be banished for social good. But, if there is no manager, there is no hierarchy. If there is no hierarchy, there is no accountability and no authority. And chaos re-emerges.

Hierarchy is a natural sorting of value. Hierarchy is a product of nature, not a social construct. Value can be placed on many things. For mate selection, the value may be attractiveness, physical, chemical, economic. The Tinder swipe is based on a hierarchy of value.

For a company, the value is competence. The organizational structure is a hierarchy of competence. A person climbs the ladder of organizational hierarchy based on their ability (capability) and expression of competence.

In the Beginning

Order and chaos. What we know and what we don’t know. No material successful output is accomplished alone. The most spectacular achievements require a team, a company, an organization.

Prior to a team, prior to an organization, there is chaos. There is no order. Defining and planning an organization brings order. The design is an analysis of what we know, or what we think we know translated into thoughts. This is thinking and the most important part of every CEOs role.

Fielding the organization, hiring people, introduces more chaos, uncertainty, ambiguity, because real people do not follow the perfect design. This is the bane of every startup.

People must be adapted to the organizational design, but there is no motivation to do so. The founder first tries to be the parent, with impatient instruction, repetition and increasing volume. “If I told you once, I told you a thousand times.”

After some time, the founder realizes that motivation will only come by enrollment of the people into the purpose of the enterprise. Next to the perfect organization design emerges the perfect purpose in the form of mission. And the founder has to talk about it. Without people, the founder only had to think. Now, the founder has to communicate, but the thoughts are ill-formed and people have questions. A discussion ensues and, if successful, a company is born. This is the constant struggle of order out of chaos.

Role of the CEO

Order and chaos. That is the balance beam, one foot in order and one foot in chaos. Order is what we know. Chaos is what we do not know. We bring order to chaos by exploring its value in relation to what we know. Assigning value is the framework of hierarchy.

The role of the CEO is to bring order from chaos. The most significant chaos is the future. The future remains chaos because it remains unknown (in spite of economists and futurists who claim to know).

That solitary role at the top must make decisions today in the face of that chaos. Why do some (very few) people land in that role? It is not mathematical logic, only one CEO per company that explains why there are so few, relative to the population. It is the value stream of hierarchy. There are not that many people with stamina against the unknown. CEOs are accountable five to ten years into the future. Most people can hardly make plans to account for the uncertainty of next week. Some people can make effective plans for the uncertainty of next month, or next year. But five years is a very long time. Elements of what we know now and call by name are only concepts in the future of five to ten years.

The primary role of a CEO is to think. Think conceptually. Most people are not very good at it. Some people who land in the role of CEO may not be very good at it. Successful CEOs are those who stand in the face of uncertainty, make decisions today, solve problems today understanding the risks of chaos in five years.

Successful CEOs are those with the capability to bring order out of chaos.

Bringing Order From Chaos

Order and chaos. That is the balance beam, one foot in order and one foot in chaos. Order is what we know. Chaos is what we do not know. We bring order to chaos by exploring its value in relation to what we know. Assigning value is the framework of hierarchy.

Organizational hierarchy is the sorting of value according to some value assignment. Before I tip my hat to the value, let’s look at the role of CEO, stand back and just watch. What do we observe about that role? What are the decisions that must be made, what are the problems that must be solved, what are the risks that must be considered and assumed? At the top? In that solitary role, for which no one else is accountable?

The value hat tip is timespan. While other members of the organization work on different things, the CEO must make the longest timespan decisions and solve the longest timespan problems, considering the longest timespan risks.

The most important task of the CEO is thinking. Thinking about what might happen in five to ten years. That thinking is full of uncertainty and ambiguity, it is full of chaos. It is the role of the CEO to bring some sense of order to that chaos. Because, today we have to make a decision. Five years from now, we may know if that decision was good or if it was bad. Who is to say? We just have to wait. But the decision must be made today.

In Praise of Hierarchy

Order and chaos. That is the balance beam, one foot in order and one foot in chaos. Order is what we know. Chaos is what we do not know. We bring order to chaos by exploring its value in relation to what we know. That value sorts into a mental construct called hierarchy. Human beings (and other life forms) do this as a natural process to determine what we pay attention to.

We assign something a value based on what we know. That value will be different for each person, if each person stops to think about it. Some people do not stop to think about what is of value and simply adopt the value chain of other people (without thinking). In this value chain, some things are more valuable than others and in the sort, a hierarchy emerges.

Organizationally, some mistakenly believe that hierarchy creates a rigid “command and control” sequence for making decisions. We don’t understand hierarchy in relation to its value chain. Organizationally, hierarchy is a value chain or value stream where managers bring value to the decision making and problem solving of their teams. This is the central role of management.

When I ask a group of managers if they have “direct reports,” all hands go up. I announce they have already fallen for the mistaken understanding that they are managers so people can report to them. The truth is, everyone in the company reports to lots of different people. But each team member can only have one manager, and the purpose of that manager is to bring value to the problem solving and decision making of each team member.

Organizational structure is simply the way we define the working relationships between two people. That most important relationship is between a manager and a team member. That is the beginning of the value stream naturally embedded in hierarchy. Bringing order out of chaos.

Levels of Work in an SME

Why would small (SME) organizations have curiosity around the research of Elliott Jaques? Admittedly, Elliott worked with large organizations, containing multiple layers of management, which demonstrates that his research had relevance in very complex structures.

But, will it work for my SME company?
If a large organization has a problem, they have budget and people resources to throw at the problem. And if they miss, they have more resources left over to try again.

If a small enterprise has a problem, they have a smaller budget and fewer resources to resolve the issue. And if they miss, it might be fatal.

Why a structural approach?
Most people call me with one of two issues. They feel they have a communication problem or a personality conflict inside the company. I allow them to explain for about ten minutes before I interrupt and interject that I do not believe it’s a communication issue or a personality conflict. I think it’s a structural problem.

Most SMEs have a flexible organizational framework, which is the beginning of the problem. The company was organized, out of necessity, to focus on things that look non-structural, like sales. Every startup has to focus on sales. If there are no sales, the company dies, sooner rather than later. As the organization creates a sustained momentum of sales, things become more complex and the organizational structure takes shape, without forethought, without discipline.

Organizational structure is simply the way we define the working relationships between people, related to these two things.

  • Accountability
  • Authority

When we fail to define the accountability in a working relationship and fail to define the authority in a working relationship, we get organizational friction that appears to be a communication problem or a personality conflict. You can have all the communication seminars you want, do all the personality testing you want, until you get clear about accountability and authority, the problems will remain and become more persistent over time.

A Failure to Communicate?

“I have a communication problem,” Sarah insisted.  “My sales manager doesn’t communicate effectively with the operations manager.”

“And?” I asked.

“Operations has been struggling.  Our backlog is best when we have about six weeks hard scheduled.  But, right now, operations has an eighteen week backlog, that’s five months.  My sales manager is apoplectic.  He says he can’t sell a project that we can’t start for five months.  He says the operations manager won’t listen to him, stonewalls him in meetings, doesn’t respond to emails.  I think we have a communications problem.”

“What have you tried?” I wanted to know.

“Well, we hired a communication consultant.  He came highly recommended.  We had four seminars, one week apart, but at the end of a month, the sales manager still had the same complaint.”

“What did the ops manager say?” I pressed.

“Oh, he says that the sales manager is unrealistic, that his operations team is working as hard as they can to keep up and the sales team has no appreciation for their effort.”  Sarah sounded a bit despondent.

“So, you think you have a communication issue, and you had a communication workshop, but the problem didn’t go away.  Do you think maybe it’s not a communication problem?”

Working Relationships

“If people do their best work in a place where they feel safe, what is it that managers can do to create that space?” I asked.

“We always want to do,” Pablo started. “If managers would only do this, do that, things would be better. It is not so much a matter of what managers do, it is a matter of the relationship between the manager and the team member. Do we have relationships built on dominance, pressure and compliance, or relationships built on cooperation, support and commitment? Organizational structure is the way we define the working relationships between people.”

“This sounds like culture,” I replied.

“Organizational structure defines the working relationships between people. Organizational structure is culture.”
—–
With inspiration from Lee Thayer, Leadership: Thinking, Being, Doing

Customers, Strategy and Structure

Structure follows strategy. Strategy follows customers. It all starts with a customer.

  • Who is your target customer segment?
  • Who is your best customer?
  • What is your best customer’s profile? How do we recognize them?
  • What does your customer need? What is necessary in your customer’s life?
  • What does your customer want? What is your customer’s preference?
  • How will you collect that data? How much data do you need?
  • How will you analyze that data?
  • How will you verify the accuracy of your analysis?

Strategy follows customers?

  • Based on what your customer needs, what is necessary in your customer’s life, what product or service can you produce to satisfy that need?
  • Will your customer be willing to pay a price for your product or service that allows you to make a reasonable profit?
  • In the profit for your product or service, is there enough volume to sustain your company’s operation?
  • Is your product or service exclusive to your company, or do competitors offer a similar product or service perceived on an equal basis?
  • Based on your customer’s preference, what will make your customer decline your competitor’s offering and buy from you? What is your competitive advantage?
  • How can you create that competitive advantage in a way that is sustainable, difficult or impossible to copy by your competitor?
  • How can you effectively communicate the competitive advantage to your customer?
  • How can you operationalize your competitive advantage to make is real, observable and obvious?

Your responses to these questions will guide your structure.

  • What core functions do you need to create the product or service your customer needs?
  • What support functions do you need to meet your customer’s preferences in the way they want to buy?
  • In each function, what is the level of work required to sustainably produce the desired outputs?
  • In what way does each function need to integrate with its neighboring functions related to work handoffs?
  • What is the output capacity of each function, and how does its output match the output capacity of its neighboring functions?

Customers drives strategy, strategy drives structure.

What’s the Level of Work Required?

From the Ask Tom mailbag –

Question:
You say that management initiatives (like communication, efficiency, goal setting and teamwork) will flounder if laid on the wrong structure. How do you get your structure right?

Response:
Determine the number of layers (only minimum necessary).
Determine the functions required.
Inside each function, determine the level of work required.

You are the captain of your business model, you get to decide the level of work that is necessary. Think about core functions and support functions. Some functions will require more intensity than others, and some functions not at all.

  • Marketing – If your business model only requires a brochure type website that gets updated from time to time, you will likely outsource that project, and need only skeleton support in marketing. If your business model requires a sophisticated website that attracts customers who roll over into an online order, you may need Marketing at S-III.
  • Sales – If your business model is a telephone center receiving product orders from consumers, likely 2-4 minutes on the phone, you may only require order takers at S-I. If your sales cycle is longer, 3-4 months, you may need S-II account executives. If your sales cycle is longer than a year, you may need S-III.
  • Account Management or Project Management – The level of work you need will likely depend on the length of your project. Two to three weeks with very few moving parts may only require Hi-S-I. If your projects are 2-3 years in scope, you may need S-IV project management.
  • Operations – the level of work you need in Ops will need to consider the length of time the project is in direct service delivery or production, but must also account for the lead time on resources, mechanical maintenance, or special technical elements.
  • Quality Assurance or Quality Control – may require timespan consideration through the production cycle, but may also need to consider the length of warranty periods or product lifecycles.
  • Research and Development – in new product development cycles, level of work may easily require system work and root cause analysis at S-III. Sustaining engineering may only require S-II.
  • Logistics – may be just in time loading dock work at S-I, but may also include long term contracts with taxi trucks in Melbourne.
  • Human Resources – level of work depends if you only need clerical filing of required forms, active recruiting from your labor system, or strategic recruiting in specialized technical fields.
  • Accounting and Finance – level of work will depend on the sophistication of your accounting requirements, simple bookkeeping to project costing, to credit facilities.

You get to decide the level of work required.