Pyramids and Squares

Human beings are, by nature, social creatures who need interaction with others and like to feel that they matter; as such, most workers are, for the most part, responsible individuals with a sense of purpose who like to give their best and enjoy seeing their efforts recognized. Many are also proactive learners and many like to feel empowered. What they do not enjoy is that sense of helplessness they feel when someone, somewhere, dictates their actions and controls their every move. Helplessness undermines their incentive to learn as much as knowing that their fate is in someone else’s hands. When helplessness sets in and becomes the norm rather than the exception, the end-result is low employee morale and a drop in productivity; in the end, everybody loses.

This is why the most successful businesses are structured more like squares and less like pyramids. This managerial style is called “localness” and is an effort to decentralize power. While in a traditional pyramid-like structure the top thinks and the local acts, the localness approach to management merges  thinking and acting in every individual. Localness is essential in today’s dynamic business environment. As local actors are more hands-on, they are also more in-touch with consumer preferences and with what the competition is doing.

Unfortunately, many managers seem to be reluctant to embrace this (relatively new) concept. Especially in rough economic times when fear is the driving force behind so many bad decisions, the need to control from the top-down and to dismiss the contributions of underlings becomes the norm. Many senior managers do not know how to make local control work, they fear losing what they perceive earns them respect, and many confuse respect with fear. Even in times of riches, many are afraid that, by delegating responsibilities, they will no longer be needed.

But this ambivalence to localness is also rooted in legitimate questions, namely: How can locally controlled organizations achieve synergy between business units and collaborative efforts toward corporate-wide objectives, if local managers are not being controlled? Localness fails when senior management refuses to delegate control to competent line managers; when they refuse to let people develop their own visions and design their own strategies; when they do not trust subordinates with the freedom to assume responsibility for their own learning. Localness also fails when local decision makers do not make good decision makers – thus the legitimate fear of releasing control.

For localness to work businesses need to invest in improving the quality of thinking, capacity for reflection, team learning and the ability to develop shared visions and understandings of complex business issues. By embracing these capabilities, the organization of the future will be in a better position to successfully be more locally controlled and, ultimately, better coordinated than its predecessor, the traditional pyramidal organization where power comes from the top down.

In conclusion:

The complexity of most business structures and the dynamic nature of the business world make it impossible for one person to control from the top down in a pyramid-like fashion, and the only way to keep up with this dynamic nature is through employee empowerment. Employee empowerment consists of treating workers like the adults they are and with the respect they deserve, of blurring the lines between superiors and subordinates. Workers will not feel as threatened by change if they feel empowered and a part of the decision-making process.  This is achieved through localness. Done the right way, it’s a win-win approach to management and it makes for good business sense.