Hierarchy Upheavals

 Que sera - sera

2012 Dec 28. The conglomerate gets a new chairman, young but experienced, handpicked and groomed to replace a living legend who took the group to unimaginable heights. It was after a two-year long search and selection process that the successor was decided up on. The choice was hailed and celebrated. On 24^th Oct 2016, in less than two years after the assumption of appointment by the individual, the Board of Directors ‘overwhelmingly’ declared that it lost confidence in the chairman and resolved to remove him from the post.

What went wrong?

The Inevitable

Time and change are inseparable companions. With time, change is inevitable. Applicable to anything known, the universal diktat holds good for organisations too. If change is evolutionary and planned, all departments of an organisation play assigned roles in the process of change. But, good, bad or ugly, unexpected changes do happen. Precipitated by situations, succession in organisations, could become abrupt events. Though, it could be sudden and one of its kind for the afflicted, abrupt or forced changes are not rare at all.

Exits

Sudden demise of a CEO or the head of a vertical can jolt an organisation's operations, albeit temporarily. Such situations, unfortunate and abrupt, are normally addressed by the hierarchical structure. Though unexpected, it doesn’t prima facia pose serious organisational challenges. However, there could be exits that could be more challenging. Early symptoms and indications notwithstanding, exit of a CEO or one of the key players from an organisation could pose serious challenges. Impact of such an exit is aggravated if few individuals collectively leave for new grazing grounds. Worse, if it is the adversary they are headed to.

‘Good riddance of bad rubbish’ apart, such situations could easily become existential crisis for organisations. Although robust systems would have given adequate warning of impending flights, credit must be given to the ability of such individuals to surreptitiously plot their move. Organisations invariably insulate themselves from such potential grief through well-crafted and legally enforceable ‘terms of engagement’ buying enough time to limit damages and find alternatives.

Removals

There could also be situations which dictate removal of individuals from positions of authority, for the good of the organisation. Notwithstanding reasons and methods adopted, stake holders may resolve to oust the individual. Such a removal is often accompanied by a purge, removing from positions of authority those individuals, whose continuance in hierarchy is considered detrimental to the interest of the organisation. This could be a tough decision with serious consequences. Yet, tough decisions are required at times.

The Chain

Organisational hierarchy defines roles and vests authority commensurate with each designation and appoints individuals. It then expects them to direct or propagate and implement directions in furtherance of organisational aims. This process, flows top down and is completed with feedback flowing bottom upwards.

Personal preferences, performance or bias driven, is bound to occur wherever transactions happen between humans for a period of time. It leads to varying levels of compatibility and trust. Depending on the level of mutual trust attained, the professional and personal relationship makes working easier, allowing informality to creep in. Extended along the chain of communication or functional flow, this informal channel becomes the real neural network of the organisation evolving into a formidable chain of authority.

This informal network is often more efficient and responsive than the official channel because of the trust amongst its members. However, if informal networks render official channels redundant organisational structure’s decay is said to be complete.

Henchmen

There could be superiors who deliberately create and forge informal networks within the organisation. Using remuneration, recognition and career mobility as baits, they easily find many down the chain, mostly afflicted with incompetency but eager to climb, willing to do their bidding. These individuals become trusted eyes and ears of the boss eventually prying and preying on the organisation as henchmen. While most of them can be easily recognised and visible, few keep their roles under wraps. These individuals represent the boss’s sphere of influence and through their actions enlarge the envelope of his/her authority. When a purge is mandated the entire neural network need to be surgically removed.

Fall Guys

There will be individuals, who by their assigned roles, are mandated to work closely with one or more individuals of the coterie. Professionally competent and upright, they normally confine their interaction strictly to professional matters and manage to maintain cordial working relationships. Their competence and organisational loyalty aside, they stand the risk of being viewed with suspicion, by the members of the coterie, their opponents and even the management on whose behalf they function. In the eventuality of a purge, they could easily become fall guys or just counted as collateral damage, paying a price for professionalism.

Fallout

As the situation of uncertainty develops and engulfs the organisation, its operations tend to get paralysed. Decisions taken seem irrational and implementation tardy. Mutual trust gives way to widespread suspicion. Formal chain of communication painstakingly built up over years, crumble under the burden of distrust. This is the worst time for an organisation to find itself in. As adversities mount, competitors will gain ground. If a riposte is not mounted quick enough, the organisation can suffer injuries that will need a long time to heal and recover from.

Convalescence

The purge demands a recoup to replace those who were eased out. The inflow would bring, in its wake, an individual or individuals who either suddenly find themselves rise in hierarchy within or are hired from outside.  Both conditions present fresh challenges to the organisation.

Whilst conditions were chaotic enough to warrant a purge, the post purge reconstitution is no less chaotic, further compounding the level of uncertainty. Roles and responsibilities might have to be redefined and chain of authority redrawn. If the new paradigm is dictated solely by the experiences that precipitated the purge, there is every chance it could be flawed. It could easily embody an element of vendetta. This could be counter-productive in the long run.

 Recovery

The process of recovery must commence with investigation to determine the causes which led to the chaos. It eventually must lead to identifying, adopting and applying measures to take the organisation forward. It is best for an outside agency to be entrusted with the task.

The new framework must predominantly focus on establishing primacy of formal chains of communication and operational controls. Besides restoring trust, remedies when implemented must restore normalcy at the earliest possible. This would reassure and motivate the rank and file.

Storm Riders 

Ships are safest in the port but are meant to ride the storm at sea. The crew is best when the ships, having ridden the storm safely berths at the port of call, only to sail out soon. Crisis and growth are inevitably inseparable. Despite all that can be done, crises do strike. It is smart to prevent and avoid crisis. The real test of organisational strength however, is in how successfully crises are handled.