We all know that the org structure itself can cause conflict—just think about the common scenario of two business partners who both want to be in charge. That structure is a “two-headed monster” that will create constant conflict even between best friends.
There are five other structural kinks you ought to know about that will set your organization up for continual tension.
The 5 Structural Inhibitors are not primarily about people. Instead, they stem from systems and processes that are bent or broken. As you read, think about how your own company is organized to see which of these Inhibitors may be setting you up for conflict.
(See my previous posts in this conflict series for an outline of the Four Dimensions of Perpetual Conflict—Relational, Structural, Personal, and Spiritual—and then the 7 Factors of the Relational Dimension.)
Structural Inhibitor #1 - End Run
This structural inhibitor happens when a leader goes around a manager to deal directly with employees (especially giving instructions or hearing and responding to complaints). Or vice versa—the employees go around their supervisor to someone further up. The End Run short-circuits the management process and makes conflicts worse. The structure on paper does not match the structure in practice, and the managers in the middle are cut off at the knees.
Structural Inhibitor #2 - Square Peg
When an employee is maintained in a role for a non-performance reason, but they are not ideally suited (or qualified) for that role. Conflict arises over double standards and missed expectations. This is a structural problem because the position the structure calls for is not filled by the right person. The structure itself is forced to limp along, and other parts must compensate for the weak or mismatched part.
Structural Inhibitor #3 - Hub & Spoke
When the leader deals with each direct report individually and all communication must pass through the leader (cross-talk between peers is not encouraged or happening). Ironically, this structure is often set up because of conflict, but it actually puts the leader in the middle of every conflict and limits options for resolution.
One leader defended this broken structure by saying, “We tried the team model, but there was too much conflict, so we went back to me meeting with each of my direct reports individually.” The conflict was still there, and the leader was spending most of his time dealing with it.
Structural Inhibitor #4 - Job Fog
When a leader/manager’s expectations are unwritten and/or unclear. I can’t tell you how many organizations I’ve seen that do not have good job descriptions—or any job descriptions at all. Job Fog is a recipe for perpetual low-level conflict. You know there is Job Fog when you hear statements like these: “I thought you were going to handle that…” “But you said it was their responsibility…” “Why didn’t you do something about...?”
Structural Inhibitor #5 - Double Vision
When an employee reports to more than one person. One of the first things I ask for when coaching leaders is a copy of their org chart. When I see two reporting lines converging down on one person, it’s usually predictive of conflict. Some leaders try to bend the rules by creating “dotted lines” of reporting, but the lack of clarity makes your team ripe for tension, confusion, and misunderstanding.
How to tell the difference?
It’s critical to tell the difference between a relational problem and a structural problem because you can’t solve a relational problem with a structural solution (or vice versa). True structural problems are baked into the org chart or are structure-based behaviors. The structure itself (on paper and in practice) must change so that the same conflict does not keep popping up.
Check the blog each week—at the end of this series we will share a downloadable map of all the conflict factors and dynamics.
Follow/Like us on Twitter, LinkedIn, or Facebook to get thoughtful articles on the bridges leaders must build and cross to inspire greater performance.