Will your current organisational structure allow sustainable growth?
If you want your business to evolve and improve, an efficient organisational framework must be in place to allow this. Proper consideration must be given to what will best suit your company and how this can be established. Structures that emerge organically can often be far from ideal, although they may seem to have developed to suit existing processes. Issues that could arise include:
Over-reliance on one or a few leaders – They will have been instrumental in building the business to its current point but will require additional input moving forward. A bottleneck in decision-making may well slow progress in this situation.
Too many middle layers – These may not add the same amount of value (i.e. profit) as they cost. The classic ‘middle management layer’ is often identified as the reason for organisational inefficiency.
‘Silos’ – With little interaction between different departments, the managers of these departments can become protective of their function, getting caught up in their own agenda rather than the wider company strategy.
The paradox of flucture is important when building the best possible shape for your organisational processes. Flexibility with regards to sharing responsibility should be in place, but within a structure where outcomes are monitored and optimised.
Leaders must be visible, aligning with their company’s values, by demonstrating the behaviours they would wish to see in their employees, such as good communication and a diligent work ethic. They should be in touch with the practical workings of the business, without relying solely on incoming reports. A balance must be struck between monitoring operations first-hand and receiving assessments from project managers, supervisors, etc.
Accessibility means stakeholders can approach the leader with any feedback, who should willingly addressing concerns and consider different ideas or points of view. Leaders should also be available at regular, pre-agreed times, whether this be personally or virtually. Separating from their key stakeholders will result in a decreased understanding of the fundamental functions of the business.
One of the inherent downsides of having a bigger company is that decisions can become slower, as there are potentially more people who need to sign them off. A way to counterbalance this, is to separate larger tasks into smaller projects. These should be aim specific, include only people who can directly impact the outcome, and last as little a time as possible.
This project mentality should increase efficiency, setting achievable goals in a rewardingly short time. A good way to introduce this is for a senior leader to sponsor the project, setting the deliverables and timescales. However, they should then step back, leaving the participants to function in a broadly autonomous way. This allows the leader to oversee multiple projects, whilst encouraging productive participation and utilising the skillsets at their disposal.
Businesses most prepared for growth have responsibility shared across their organisation; this means the person with the most relevant expertise can take charge. That one or a couple of leaders could have every possible answer to every possible challenge is impossible. Sharing this accountability has the twin benefits of reducing the chance of overload further up the organisational structure, and increasing engagement further down it, by encouraging participation.
Are the leaders in your company both visible and accessible to key stakeholders? Could you introduce a project mentality, which might increase engagement and efficiency? Is responsibility shared across your organisation to prevent overloads and empower employees?