People who know me know that I despise management consulting firms. I have written before how in my view the process of benchmarking has done more to destroy innovation than probably any other practice promoted by both strategy consulting firms and investment consulting firms. Today, let’s talk about another bugbear of mine, the drive towards flat hierarchies.
Contra Klement seems this: One trend in the military is encouraging and training and expecting initiative lower in the hierarchy. Not the same as fully-flattening the hierarchy, but not different either, since part of the hierarchy loses part of its hierarchical status, namely the decision-making part.
"Mission command and control can be described as spontaneous: unity of effort is not the product of conformity imposed from above but of the spontaneous cooperation of all the elements of the force.9 Subordinates are guided not by detailed instructions and control measures but by their knowledge of the requirements of the overall mission. In such a system, the commander holds a loose rein, allowing subordinates significant freedom of action and requiring them to act with initiative. Discipline imposed from above is reinforced with self-discipline throughout the organization. Because it decentralizes decisionmaking authority and grants subordinates significant freedom of action, mission command and control demands more of leaders at all levels and requires rigorous training and education."
And to change the subject to the evolutionary value of hierarchy, have a peek at
Agree, there is Mission Control which tasks units with executing the commander’s intent but doesn’t prescribe a specific way to do it. Personally, I would classify that as autonomy but not a flat hierarchy. But point well taken. 👍
There is no one size fits all approach. Flat hierarchies can be more efficient for less complex tasks; but for more difficult endeavors (45 minutes "benchmark" in the escape room experiment), having a leader can help coordinate tasks and avoid duplication of efforts or working at cross-purposes.
I had not read your article about benchmarking before - a very good read. This is not the first and will not be the last idea dreamt up by consultants to keep themselves relevant. I wonder if they actually implement these bright ideas within their own organizations or is it a case of "Do as I say, not as I do".
Apr 6, 2022·edited Apr 6, 2022Liked by Joachim Klement
My first reaction is that technology is an omitted dimension. Work management platforms reduce the "work about work" that Asana claims can be up to 60% of knowledge work. In this traditional work, a key function managers in the hierarchy is to filter information. But in tech-enabled work, the optimal environment is (mostly shared) transparency such that a manager's job changes; less time spent amplifying/filtering environmental information. The escape room, to the extent all players have access to the entire internal environment, is nearer to to an information-transparent organization.
Viewed through the role of technology's impact on work, both dynamics make sense to me: the military's shift toward looser reins, as Thomas says. On the other hand, having played escape room, the research matches my experience. I did it once without any leadership and we were a chaotic mess (although I'm unclear what it means to "motivate" in an escape room!). In this way, I'm thinking that as the organization shifts toward information transparency, the nature of the old hierarchy changes but in some way that leadership and management still have a role.
Contra Klement seems this: One trend in the military is encouraging and training and expecting initiative lower in the hierarchy. Not the same as fully-flattening the hierarchy, but not different either, since part of the hierarchy loses part of its hierarchical status, namely the decision-making part.
Read, e.g., https://irp.fas.org/doddir/usmc/mcdp6/ch2.htm regarding the Mission Orders style of command and control, here is a snippet example:
"Mission command and control can be described as spontaneous: unity of effort is not the product of conformity imposed from above but of the spontaneous cooperation of all the elements of the force.9 Subordinates are guided not by detailed instructions and control measures but by their knowledge of the requirements of the overall mission. In such a system, the commander holds a loose rein, allowing subordinates significant freedom of action and requiring them to act with initiative. Discipline imposed from above is reinforced with self-discipline throughout the organization. Because it decentralizes decisionmaking authority and grants subordinates significant freedom of action, mission command and control demands more of leaders at all levels and requires rigorous training and education."
And to change the subject to the evolutionary value of hierarchy, have a peek at
tomveatch.com/bliss/hierarchy.php#FromTo
Best,
Tom
Agree, there is Mission Control which tasks units with executing the commander’s intent but doesn’t prescribe a specific way to do it. Personally, I would classify that as autonomy but not a flat hierarchy. But point well taken. 👍
There is no one size fits all approach. Flat hierarchies can be more efficient for less complex tasks; but for more difficult endeavors (45 minutes "benchmark" in the escape room experiment), having a leader can help coordinate tasks and avoid duplication of efforts or working at cross-purposes.
I had not read your article about benchmarking before - a very good read. This is not the first and will not be the last idea dreamt up by consultants to keep themselves relevant. I wonder if they actually implement these bright ideas within their own organizations or is it a case of "Do as I say, not as I do".
My first reaction is that technology is an omitted dimension. Work management platforms reduce the "work about work" that Asana claims can be up to 60% of knowledge work. In this traditional work, a key function managers in the hierarchy is to filter information. But in tech-enabled work, the optimal environment is (mostly shared) transparency such that a manager's job changes; less time spent amplifying/filtering environmental information. The escape room, to the extent all players have access to the entire internal environment, is nearer to to an information-transparent organization.
Viewed through the role of technology's impact on work, both dynamics make sense to me: the military's shift toward looser reins, as Thomas says. On the other hand, having played escape room, the research matches my experience. I did it once without any leadership and we were a chaotic mess (although I'm unclear what it means to "motivate" in an escape room!). In this way, I'm thinking that as the organization shifts toward information transparency, the nature of the old hierarchy changes but in some way that leadership and management still have a role.
Your example is more like no hierarchy as opposed to flat hierarchy.