The secret science of organisational hierarchy: seven lessons for leaders
A hierarchy is a highly complex arrangement. The image often associated with the word ‘hierarchy’ is that of the traditional structure, where authority cascades through layers of accountability from top to bottom through a vertical alignment. While that may be the popularised perception, organisations are in fact a complex mix of hierarchies. The larger the organisation, the deeper and more complex the hierarchical configuration.
Organisational effectiveness relies heavily on the extent to which these hierarchies are understood. Specifically, their interrelationships, interdependencies as well as the unwritten codes and conventions that govern their effective functioning. The dynamic characteristics of hierarchies such as where they run in parallel, how they intersect and whether they overlap must also be understood.
This blog seeks to explore all the above and more, by challenging conventional wisdom and traditional thinking. Set out below is: ‘the secret science of organisational hierarchy: seven lessons for leaders’.
1. Hierarchy of accountability
One of the most misunderstood — sometimes deliberately so — aspects of the vertical hierarchy is the expectation of mutual accountability. In this ‘flat hierarchy,’ superiors are as equally accountable to subordinates as subordinates are to superiors. Mutual accountability is essential because it promotes equality and should prevent abuse from those in senior positions. However, as noble as it may be on paper, the application of this principle is not as straightforward in practice. This is because, superiors can often leverage their top-down authority to avoid accountability to their subordinates.
2. Hierarchy of knowledge
Within any organisation, those who hold knowledge have a profound impact on how well workforce capabilities and assets are utilised and how much gets done. Unlike the vertical hierarchy, where knowledge is shared according to levels of authority, an organisation’s knowledge hierarchy operates under entirely different conventions. For instance, possession of knowledge can establish status and standing irrespective of seniority. With this perceived ‘importance’, those in possession can then use access to knowledge, or denial of it, to leverage influence over others.
3. Hierarchy of trust
The hierarchy of trust is a fascinating construct. Trust is relational. It is a social currency that is derived from common interest, reciprocity, credibility and confidence. Within this hierarchy, hight trust is a product of disagreement or dissent. As a case in point, when a person consents [without coercion] even though they profoundly disagree, this demonstrates the highest degree of trust. By contrast, when someone enthusiastically consents to that which they are already predisposed, this is a demonstration of low-level trust. Ultimately, the hierarchy of trust measures the integrity of a relationship.
4. Hierarchy of influence
Influence is not to be confused with authority. Where authority effects compliance through the vertical hierarchy, influence leads to discipline, through relational bonds. Unsurprisingly therefore, the hierarchy of influence will often bear no resemblance to lines of accountability within the vertical hierarchy. This is because the hierarchy of influence, unlike authority, cannot be ‘manufactured’ through assignment, directive or instruction. Rather, it is a configuration that is determined by credibility, trustworthiness, empathy, compassion and predictability.
5. Hierarchy of assumption
This is a little appreciated hierarchical construct that speaks to the ‘business climate’ within a workplace. The hierarchy of assumption is demonstrated by what employees are willing to believe about their colleagues and employer. As a case in point, when in receipt of information, that may have potentially negative implications, is the default to assume the worst or to reserve judgement. Factors that contribute towards assumption include previous experience as well as the perceptions of others. The hierarchy of assumption is important because, it determines the efficacy of working relationships and overall productivity.
6. Hierarchy of choice
The hierarchy of choice is important because it loops back to the level of discipline that exists within an organisation and the capacity of leaders to leverage influence across the workforce. Where employee choice aligns to discipline, this suggests a level of conscientiousness and commitment. These characteristics are essential as they are the engine room of organisational productivity. When choice is aligned to professional priorities, rather than personal preferences, organisations are well placed to utilise their capabilities and maximise outcomes.
7. Hierarchy of expectation
Expectations are the products of relationships and the building blocks of business effectiveness. For leaders, a realistic hierarchy of expectation is predicated on an understanding of individual and collective capabilities. This understanding must be derived from previous experience, present performance as well as prospects for the future. It should also be set against a backdrop of prevailing realities. Grounded in reasonableness, the hierarchy of expectation empowers organisations to make the best use of available resources, moderate risks and deliver results.
As this blog explains, hierarchies are an essential part of every organisation. Knowledge of their dimensions, complexity, scope and reach is a critical requirement for business effectiveness, not a nice to have. Unfortunately, while leaders may be aware of various workplace hierarchies, too often their understanding of them is poorly developed. As a result, the opportunity to enhance the potential of these nebulous structures will be limited as best.
Paul Aladenika is host of the 11th Thing Podcast
