The Belgian medievalist Francois Louis Ganshof provided the popular definition of feudalism as (in its most basic form) a tiered society that had a king/queen above lords and the peasantry at the base. Ironically, the 21st-century organisation has taken this basic concept and turbocharged it. Large organisations now commonly prefer an average of eight layers of management rather than the meagre three tiers of feudalistic society.
The intention is clear: command, control, centralisation.
It makes sense, doesn’t it? Easy to understand, clear, and nominally based on meritocracy and experience: the cream rises to the top.
However, this brings with it a whole tranche of consequences that are a blight on the modern company. The most obvious and familiar of these tyrannies is that of bureaucracy, where research has shown that the average employee sits in six hours of “coordination and update” meetings a week*.
Hierarchies often result in defensiveness
Yet, it has also deepened the most grievous of medieval trends, namely that of factionalism and in-fighting. Hierarchies, rather than providing a structured system for organising disparate groups towards a common goal, often result in defensiveness and introversion over collaboration and progress.
So, why do we continue down this cursed road and not consider an alternative path? Surely with all our ingenuity, we can muster something more progressive than the current approach?
Consider this, let’s flip it on its head and say that instead of organising based on a three-sided shape, we base it on a webbed network of all employees (or should I say, peasants).
Small, autonomous, multidisciplinary teams
What about if those employees congregated around small, autonomous, multidisciplinary teams that have a distinct responsibility for an outcome?
Those individuals could be centred on an outcome they are closest to, have the most knowledge about, and are given the reins of control to make swift decisions on how to achieve it. Certainly, they would be more likely to do it better and quicker than if they were subservient to the whims of the structural blockers that exist in pyramid structures.
And let’s not forget the context within which we are currently existing, where we are seeing change on a scale and speed that we have never experienced before. Lucky for old Henry VIII he didn’t have to figure out how to handle the metaverse only a couple of years after the CD-ROM went out of fashion.
With this approach, the level of autonomy in their work will force frontline employees to take ownership of the results they produce. Autonomy breeds responsibility, which, in turn, means that staff are more heavily invested in the outcome of their work, because it is exactly that, theirs. Not something determined for them, but owned, shaped, and delivered by them.
Needless to say, this may sound all too impractical and daunting, but let me remind you of the old adage that complacency is the enemy of progress. Alternatively, it’s “as you were” and we bring back the printing press.
This blog is part one of a four-part series on people and change management. Find out more information on the series here, and if you need any support tackling your business challenges, get in touch.
