Of flat hierarchies & role conflicts

There are clear hierarchies in most companies. From the managing director to the head of department to their deputies and other positions: Employees usually have many people above them. The exact distribution depends on the size of the company. In the past, strong hierarchies and very strict structures were the rule. Today, many companies are opting for an alternative structure. Strict rules and structures are gradually being dismantled.

From strict structures to flat hierarchies

Hierarchies exist in different forms in every company. They differ noticeably in their strictness and form. Many companies today have positive experiences with flat hierarchies. They report more motivation among employees and better team cohesion.

We speak of flat hierarchies when there are fewer hierarchical levels in a company or other group than normal. This can take the form of more employee participation in the form of voting or discussions.

Some teams even go so far as to ensure that decisions are always made by consensus. This often runs counter to a traditional leadership role. After all, a manager makes decisions. However, if decisions are always made by finding a common solution, this is a flat hierarchy. Interpersonal encounters also take place on a different level. This can often be seen in the way people are addressed. Where there are flat hierarchies, members of a work team are on first-name terms more often.

In general, flat hierarchies are characterized by simple, unhindered communication and overarching, collaborative work. Cooperation - also between management and employees - is predominantly perceived as collegial. The details depend on the individual case. For example, a company can give individual employees more responsibility or reach decisions through democratic voting.

However, there are also companies that are not very successful with flat hierarchies. Experts attribute these differences to the age of the company and the generations of employees, among other things. In companies with long-established traditions, the changeover can be much more difficult.

If structures have been in place for decades or the workforce consists of older generations (and is therefore also accustomed to long-lasting structures), a change in the hierarchy may meet with a great deal of resistance.

One example:

In a company that has been in existence for 100 years, there are three levels. There is a management position at the top level. There are three managers at the middle level. Below them are various employees. The management position ultimately makes all important decisions alone. Only in a few cases does it seek advice from the managers. It mainly distributes tasks to the managers, who in turn pass on tasks to their circle of employees. If the management position now wants to bring about change and ensure flat hierarchies, this can cause resentment, especially among managers. After all, they have worked hard for their title. They are used to having more responsibility and more decision-making power. Now finding themselves on the same level as employees can be unfamiliar and undesirable for them. There may be a feeling that a title is being taken away from them.

Young companies, start-ups and those with a very young workforce in particular are more successful with flat hierarchies. This is due to the fact that the mindset can be very different between generations.

Definition: Mindset

A mindset is a defined set of attitudes or values. It can be determined across groups or individually.

If certain structures and traditions have proven themselves in a company over several decades or even centuries, it is difficult to change them. These traditions are also often difficult to remove from the minds of employees. Younger people are increasingly looking for freedom of development and development opportunities. They want to work independently, take on responsibility and try things out. Many companies with young employees have had great success with this. Employees feel seen with flat hierarchies and can work more independently. They do not cling to long-standing traditions because they have not been able to establish themselves in the first place. Anyone working in a company that has been in existence for decades or even centuries should therefore be prepared for the fact that flat hierarchies can only be created gradually. Strict structures cannot be dismantled overnight. Rather, they must be changed slowly and gradually. In a company where the boss voluntarily makes changes to the hierarchy gradient, positive changes are particularly evident. If the manager is motivated to bring about change, this motivation can also have a strong impact on the employees. If, on the other hand, the manager himself is not entirely convinced, this feeling can also spread to the employees. In some cases, flat hierarchies are unsuccessful because managers feel they have to adapt to the changing values of the labor market, but there is no real conviction in the new methods.

Changes through digital solutions

Experts also see increasing digitalization as a reason for structural changes in many companies. Nowadays, more and more processes are taking place digitally. In some cases, this allows for greater flexibility. This also means that less stringent framework conditions are required. Quite the opposite in fact: the general fast pace of the modern age and the constant changes, particularly in the context of technical and digital advances, require a high degree of flexibility. Long-term planning for years or even decades is hardly possible. Digital solutions ensure that information is disseminated more widely. What's more, technology is changing so quickly these days that new methods are constantly being used. There always seems to be a newer, better technology on the market. Original structures and methods are quickly considered outdated. Nowadays, a specialist has to constantly develop and train further. They have to learn much faster than in previous years. Decisions have to be constantly reviewed and adapted. Changes often come faster than desired. A company must be able to react flexibly. There is hardly any room left for strict planning and structures. Managers have to be agile. This means that they increasingly have to find themselves in different roles. In the past, hierarchies ensured that management worked from the top down. You can imagine this as a manager standing at the top of a staircase. The other employees stood in their positions on each step below. Today, the picture is rather flat. Imagine a group picture with one person at the front in the middle. All group members are walking the same way. There are no steps on which individual members stand and look down on the others. Instead, one person leads the way and the others follow - but are always on the same level. In a figurative sense, this means that a leader does not lead from above, but sets a good example. Of course, this only works if the overall structures of the company allow for such leadership. Under certain circumstances, certain changes may have to be made on a larger scale.

Role conflicts in leadership

A manager is not always a leader or a popular figure. In earlier times, when strict structures were still the rule, a leader often had to exude a certain dominance. Where flat hierarchies are the rule, this is not absolutely necessary. Here too, a manager is not always the employees' best friend. Strict orders do not have to be on the agenda. Nevertheless, the manager must be able to maintain an overview and make decisions in case of doubt. This means that as a manager you will certainly often find yourself in different roles. In many cases, you will want to act on the same level as employees. You then slip into the role of an employee, possibly a mentor. In other situations, you will need to give quick instructions and take on the role of someone who gives orders and whose instructions must be followed. In still other situations, you will conduct appraisal interviews and find yourself in the role of a coach. In stricter structures and hierarchies, there are often fewer role conflicts. In this context, management was the measure of all things: there were clear instructions, clearly defined areas of responsibility and strict structures. Decisions and instructions were solely in the hands of the manager. There was not much to move and no different roles that the management had to take on. Things can look very different today. Where flat hierarchies are the order of the day, a manager has many different roles.

The most important of these include:

• Coach
• Mentor
• Decision maker
• Contact person for problems
• External representation
• Mediator

The management still gives instructions and suggestions here and there, but creates space for employees to take responsibility and develop themselves. They must be there when employees need help, but also motivate them to find their own solutions. Under certain circumstances, this can certainly lead to conflicts.

A number of tactics are suitable for avoiding or resolving role conflicts as far as possible. These tactics mainly have to do with self-awareness. You can read more about role conflicts and solutions to the problem in one of the following chapters. However, as these conflicts can also arise due to the many different ways of leading a team, you will first gain an insight into leadership styles. Over time, a manager must recognize when which role is appropriate. This often comes with years of work experience. However, trying out new ideas, flattening existing hierarchies and testing...