Friday, September 11, 2009
Silo Centricity
After my expatriate assignment, I came back to India to start a new group. The downturn did not help and I was resource-challenged. I did not have the critical mass in one particular function to execute the projects. Seeking help, from other teams during peak needs is one thing, but depending on them to fill your critical mass is an entirely different story. I have been steadily en-cashing on the goodwill (or the emotional bank account as Steven Covey would put it) I had already built with my peer managers, to support my team as best as I could. With these acts, I am now infamously known as the beggar who rides a Honda Civic. I feel that the root of my problem lies in the organizational structure. When an organization is vertically focused, the teams operate in silos that are impregnable like the Great Wall of China.
I believe that there is a reason why different types of organizational structures exist – vertical, horizontal, matrix. Any structure would work as long it is not overdone. Through this blog I make a case that silo structure is not a preferred structure for a remote site.
Talking of organizational structures, the most obvious analogy that comes to mind is the comparison between a joint-family and a nuclear family. In a joint family, resources like milk, groceries, gas are optimally utilized. During emergency (aka project deadlines) one can fall back on the other members of the family. Grooming (aka mentoring) of kids for good habits happens naturally. There is the head of the family (aka site head) who resolves issues inside the family and makes sure the sense of belongingness is high. When a new member (aka new-hire) joins the family the existing members of the family go beyond and help to make sure the new member of the family feels at home. Any new venture (aka incubating a new group) attempted by one family has the support from the other families.
While there are many of the advantages of a joint family (aka horizontal structure) it is not without issues. One of the key issues is the perceived lack of freedom or privacy (aka role clarity) in a joint family. For the family that is earning more, there is this complex that they are doing more for the joint family than others. The head of the family hogs all the limelight causing lack of visibility for others in the family. No system or structure is devoid of issues. One has to look at relative merits and demerits, and the context before the right structure is chosen.
Coming to the core issue of the blog, I strongly believe that for a remote site a silo structure is not a preferred one. A remote site needs teams to cooperate and work together to make the parent company and the remote site successful. Similar to patriotism, there is a sense of pride among the people working in the remote site to make their site successful. Teams working in silos do not help in this endeavor. The situation with silo structure becomes worse, if there is no direct reporting to the local site head. If the local site head cannot exercise control then he/she is not directly accountable for the success of the site. He merely ends up being a general management person taking care of administrative activities. As in the analogy of joint family, the head of the family has the responsibility and accountability to ensure that the entire family prospers. His responsibility includes resolving problems/issues (aka execution issues) within the family, to put the house in order. However in the silo structure the local site head loses the power to exercise control and do what is good for the parent company AND the remote site. To solve my resourcing issue in a silo structure, the site-head can, at best, influence the managers of the silos to help me out. As the silos directly report to the parent vertical, their first line of accountability is with them and not with the local site. If any of the silo team is reasonably large then they may have sufficient bandwidth to support my needs and, at the same time, manage the expectations of their parent vertical. This, however, depends on the willingness of the silo manager to help me. If each of the silo teams are small and have just enough bandwidth, then, on their own, they cannot help my needs. This is where a structure which is more horizontal than vertical, can leverage the pool of resources across various silos to come to my rescue.
The silo structure is not conducive for building credibility of the whole site and thus may not help in incubating new groups. Both of these are critical for the success of a remote site. One of the challenges I faced, starting this new group, was to re-establish the credibility of the team with the new vertical, despite the three of us having a combined industry experience of 28 years. We were being looked at as three individuals with independent accomplishments. In the case of a horizontal structure, the local site head can showcase credibility using the accomplishments of the whole site. The sponsor of the new group also has enough confidence in the existing talent infrastructure, to kick-start the group. Incubating new groups is easier in this structure, as the site manager can tap into the talent pool across the different silo groups. More importantly it provides career growth paths for different talents, spread between different silos.
In summary I feel that the organizational structure for a remote site should not be a silo structure until each silo has enough critical mass on its own to deliver results and also help incubating new groups.
Happy Reading,
Ram
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Ramanju,
There is a recurring theme I'm noticing in your recent blogs. It is certainly a difference between how you and I think.
Mathematically described it is to solve a problem F(n) you want to get the problem F(n+1) solved. That doesn't work (it won't terminate). My thinking would be to get the problem solved at level F(n-1) (mathematical induction) which terminates at n=1. As you have noted in your percentage fallacy blog "Get a dedicated resource" is the best way out for you. Second best is to reach out to the resources themselves. Third best would be involving the "silo" managers. Involving the site-head would be even less effective.
I think it will be hard if not impossible to get a person in a silo to get the big picture.
I guess I'm saying that the whole idea of an org structure is bunk. Silo centric or otherwise.
Post a Comment