Life in an organizational hierarchy: is this the best we can do?

I had an interesting moment at work today that made me think of office structure and space. I work in an open space environment, no walls between colleagues, no cubicles. Just one giant room with desks and a few offices. Today, it was especially loud. To be completely fair, from the point of view of those who were being vocal, they were just doing their job. They’re good people and I don’t blame them one bit. One of the biggest advantages of working in an open space like that is that you can collaborate with one another rather easily. The biggest disadvantage is that when you’re not part of that collaboration, you end up being part of the captive audience – for eight hours.

I learned a few years ago that sometimes, just by simply taking a chance and asking for something might actually result in you getting what you want. I had a pretty big hunch that I wouldn’t get what I wanted, but I needed to ask, just in case. So I did: “So, can I work temporarily in so and so’s old office when it gets loud?”. The answer was “sure”. I thought that was awesome and more than adequate. But then I wondered if maybe I could actually just get the entire office to myself. So I asked. And I was pretty much told that offices are reserved for higher-ups; it wouldn’t be fair to others who might also want an office with a door that closes. Like it or not, from a management perspective, I would have given an employee the same answer.

That’s life in an office hierarchy. It’s what most of us know and can readily relate to. I would guess that it’s also the most common structure used in organizations today. In fact, there’s a whole industry that caters specifically to things like organizational structures and occupational psychology and how spaces can be used to improve communications or how it can be used to display power. The trouble is that there are a lot of competing theories and companies are still resistant to change. Some people just like to run things the way that they’ve been taught to run things, usually, by example and by past experience.

So I spent a couple of hours reading about organization structure. Great way to spend an evening, isn’t it? But it is interesting. The more you read about it, the more you realize that there are better models out there and that a lot of company leaders are realizing that the good old hierarchy they’ve always used is actually more damaging than they thought.

The problem lies in the fact that a lot of people are simply promoted to their highest level of incompetence (the Peter Principle). They might know it themselves but the pressure within a hierarchy is always to go up the ranks. Otherwise, you might be subjected to the office rumormill as that “guy or gal who lacks ambition”. It’s always about more recognition, more money, more power, more. A hierarchy encourages “more”, not “the best”. People are afraid to be the best in their jobs because it might prevent them from being promoted! And some do it for bragging rights: the parking spot, the business card, the “senior” title and of course, the office with a door that closes.

We do ridiculous things in hierarchies that I doubt we would do to each other if everyone was stripped of their titles. Thoreau said: “It is an interesting question how far men would retain their relative rank if they were divested of their clothes”. In other words, people would be judged based on their character, not whether or not they make the most money and therefore can afford that expensive suit.

Also, we don’t use space effectively in office buildings that have a mixture of offices and open spaces with or without cubicles. When senior members of the team leave the company, offices are left vacant. Sometimes temporarily and sometimes, for years! I’ve seen office spaces that probably spent more money paying heating, electrical and maintenance costs for vacant spaces than they spent on things that really mattered, like employee training, employee recruitment and retention, marketing, etc.  Because, in a hierarchy, we even physically separate people by title – not by who might require the quiet or private space more than others.

Isn’t this idea contrary to a company’s best interests? Officially, we’re no longer in a recession. But it’s made me wonder if corporate leaders have taken new measures to cut costs and ensure the best possible organization structure for their companies to promote future growth. Is it possible that a simple change of structure could do all that?

Maybe!

Here’s an article that presents an alternative to hierarchies:
http://sanantonio.bizjournals.com/sanantonio/stories/2005/12/26/editorial3.html
Here’s a breakdown of different organization structures with their pros and cons:
http://dept.lamar.edu/industrial/underdown/org_mana/org_structure_george.htm
Also, I’ve heard that a lot of government offices are now moving to matrix management: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matrix_management

On my way home, I was crossing City Hall when I noticed that the art gallery was still open. It was featuring “The Generations Project” by Adrienne Herron. She photographed three women, all in different stages of life. As per the pamphlet, “the granddaughters had to have passed their 18th birthday and the grandmothers their 80th”. The photographs were beautiful but eventually, it just became photos of three people side by side. But it made me wonder about how often we do things just because our ancestors have done them that way.

There’s an old saying that goes like this:
“A woman kept cutting off a part of her roast and one day, she wondered why she had to cut that piece off each time she cooked one. So she asked her mom why that part of the roast had to be cut off. The mother replied “well, it’s because that’s how your grandmother taught me to make it”. So, the young girl went to her grandmother’s house and asked her the same question “oh, that’s just the way my mother taught me to cook it”. So, the young girl went to her great-grandmother’s house and asked her “why do you cut the end of the roast off before placing it in the pot?”. The great-grandmother replied “oh dear, I do it because I don’t have a pot big enough to fit the roast!”.

We really should start examining the way we do things and ask ourselves if we’re doing just because everyone else is doing it or because it’s the smartest, most efficient and intelligent thing to do?

Related posts:

1. Women’s studies, feminism and life as a girl