Most people complain about "silos" in their organisation. Unless you work in a small organisation, you are likely to be frustrated by internal rivalries and turf protection. What is it about human nature that explains this near-universal experience? And through the knowledge of human instincts, what can we do to minimise the problem?
The reasons for silos
Reason 1 - Magical 150
We can predict from human instincts that intra-organisational rivalries and turf protection will occur in organisations that employ more than 150 people.
The size of the human brain drives the size of group from which we gain our identity. Oxford professor Robin Dunbar is an expert on the topic. He argues that living in complex social groups demands a significant amount of intellect - to keep in touch with and manage the complexities of relationships with others in your community. Humans have the largest brain-per-body size of any animal on the planet. On Dunbar's analysis the brain-per-body ratio of humans correlates to a community size of 150, which is indeed the size of primitive, or natural, human groups.
So, if 150 is the number of people we naturally associate with, we have a fundamental challenge when our organisation grows beyond that size. Our brains are just not large enough to associate with and gain identity in 2,000, 20,000 or 200,000 people organisations. Our brains are not large enough to manage the social and political complexities in group sizes significantly beyond 150. Therefore in large organisations, people are naturally going to associate with their department, subsidiary or geography of a human scale of around 150.
And in small organisations that grow toward and beyond 150, people will start to say, "It's not as friendly as it used to be", and, "We don't know everyone like the old days".
Reason 2 - Hierarchy
Silo behaviour is strongly impacted by the behaviour of the top team. Members of the executive team are members of two teams - the one they lead and the executive team itself. Their personal association to both teams should be balanced, tilted slightly in favour of their membership of the executive team. Often, however, members of the top team associate primarily with their role as the leader of their unit. After all, as leaders of their own unit, they are the alpha individual.
However, the consequence is that they have little emotional connection with their colleagues on the top team, even to the extent of merely humouring each other and paying lip service as members of the top team. In this case, membership of the top team becomes ceremonial and the individuals' real identity is with their unit, and the foundation condition for a culture of silo and turf protection is established.
Reason 3 - Similarities
We naturally relate to people like us. So after an organisation grows beyond 150, the sense of belonging will move away from "us" as a single community into a series of "us and thems" where belonging is mostly between like-minded groups. This is often around professional groupings of people with a shared outlook. The result is geographical or functional silos where say, Regions criticise Head Office, HR argues with Finance. Sales doesn't see eye-to-eye with Marketing, and Manufacturing just doesn't understand Engineering and vice-versa. Group rivalry, arguments and misunderstandings result.
Actions to reduce silos
Given that for medium to large organisations, silos will naturally emerge, what can leaders do to contain the negative aspects of intra-group rivalries and competition?
- Structure according to preferred silos
Given that a world free of silos is unlikely, organisations should be structured to align people to the most preferred group identity. What reporting lines will reflect the clanning you most want? And can you accept the consequential tensions and competition this structure might create? Seek to structure your organisation in natural groups that generate the most energy for group members.
- Build social collegiality amongst the top team
To reduce silos, the CEO needs to build a team spirit where executives have a strong identity with the executive team. If the top leader does not build the emotional collegiality amongst the top team, then they drive the social belonging of the individuals to the level below them. Often, because the CEO has little need for collegiality, they unwittingly increase the likelihood of silo behaviour. Build the emotional connection amongst the top team instead.
- Regularly switch the roles of the top team
To avoid executives being selfishly devoted to their role as a unit leader, regularly change the roles of the top team. Head of HR becomes head of Customer Service. Head of Sales becomes head of Marketing. The outcome is that the individual leaders know that their primary purpose and identity is in their membership of the top team and less so the portfolio that they happen to be responsible for right now. Moving to another function also allows the executive member to be more appreciative of the work of the new function.
- Value every group equally
CEOs often value one group in their organisation more than others. This drives feelings of elitism of the one favoured department, and resentment as second-class citizens amongst the rest, with consequential "them and us" competition and jealousy. Ideally, the top leader demonstrates the value of all sections of the organisation
- Attend to destructive behaviour
Top leaders should not accept destructive, competitive, intra-group behaviour. The CEO should specifically make clear that competitive group behaviour will not be tolerated, and if it appears, address it immediately. If a member of their team persists in destructive behaviour, the CEO needs to make the choice for them by moving them out of the top team. If the CEO does not make this a requirement of group membership, then in organisations beyond 150, we can predict that silo behaviour will be destructive and systemic. It's a choice of the CEO and is an appropriate use of their power as the head of the hierarchy.