Unity of command

Clear lines of command are important in many ways. They help ensure clarity of vision throughout an organization, accountability among its members, and efficient execution of its goals. This principle is so important that it is a central consideration in organizational design. Even apparent violations of it - such as the matrix system in past years, or more current “bottom-up” methods - are always (or ought to be) executed with careful reference to the potential for damage that may be done by any departures from its key elements.

Certainly, there is room to improve - particularly in the interface between top management and boards - but the idea of a unified chain of command is so fundamental that few even question it. We all believe we have a firm grip on what it is in our organizations - who we report to, who reports to us, who makes decisions and who executes them. Management development and career guidance gurus even build many of their ideas on the simple expediency of knowing what your chain of command is and how to “work” it.

But are you really so sure that you know everything there is to know about the chain of command in your organization? Because the truth is that - as Chris, in a comment on a recent post, touched upon - there are at least two - maybe more - and only one is the formal one. And that one may not even be the most influential one in your outfit.

All organizations have an informal chain of command operating outside the official constraints of the formal management system of the firm. This unofficial system acts either to reinforce or challenge - or sometimes both, variously - the pronouncements of the official version.

You can rest assured that often, when you leave a room after announcing a policy change or operational decision, your staff doesn’t simply turn to it - they turn to each other, to the acknowledged and respected experts among themselves, asking silently, “Well, now, what are we supposed to make of that?”

The issue may be debated, and the resulting enthusiasm with which your staff supports, or even sabotages, the initiative will be determined by the results of that discussion, the considered opinions of the old hands - fellow-employees trusted as those who understand the company, the issues facing it, and who can best assimilate the implications of your instructions both for the firm and for themselves as individuals working in it.

Don’t kid yourselves about this. As a manager, it is among your duties to understand the unofficial chain of command as an inescapable fact of organizational life. Further, you need to find a way to manage it, as well as all the other balls you’re juggling. Because if you can’t keep this one in the air and in line - the others will soon be hitting the ground.

Managers who do appreciate this, and who learn to incorporate it as a vital element of their managerial responsibilities, often seem to be able effortlessly to juggle the most unlikely and ungainly mixture of tasks. But the reason for that is simple: they have at least two chains of command actively supporting them.

How many do you have backing you up?

—

We appreciate your visits here very much, and would love to have you as a regular reader. Please take a moment to subscribe, either by email or via an RSS reader, using the options available just below or at the upper right. And welcome aboard!

—

Technorati Tags: matrix system, chain of command, Unity of Command, Accountability, Management Development