The notion of independence runs deep in the psyches of both the American citizen as it does in corporate America. As Americans, we believe (and rightly so) that the paragon of self-actualization is reached when we have gained a sense of independence.
As a father of two kids that are just now beginning to gain a sense of independence, I can see the glimmer of confidence that comes from two burgeoning pre-teen adolescents that are learning how to do more and more for themselves with each passing day. In fact, the notion of independence is so highly regarded across our world that approximately 163 of the 225 or countries on record, set aside at least one day out of the year to celebrate their independence in one form or another.
The reality is that neither an individual nor an organization can truly become independent unless it is first largely interdependent on someone, or some group, to guide them, however countervailing and anathematic this notion might be for most of us.
The company is a series of interdependent set of teams
We do not have to search far and wide to see that even in the most independent of companies, the internal machinery that makes the company independent consists of a series of interdependent teams. Even the largest conglomerates that seem to have complete autonomy in their pursuits for increased profits, are completely dependent on teams ranging from internal corporate departments, to subcontractors, vendors and consultants to maintain independence.
We may glorify the battlefield general for his or her courage and independent thought that translate into battles won, but we often fail to see that these seminal victories only came about because the soldiers in the trenches were both interdependent and accountable for one another’s life.
In the same manner, corporate functions can only truly operate when the series of interdependent relationships among them work together within a culture of accountability and mutual appreciation for what each function does.
While the marketing department “can make it rain” by bringing on another client or account, that newly acquired rain event can become a disaster if operations, engineering or manufacturing cannot deliver.
Seek to Create more Dependence Among Teams & Unify
The only manner of attaining true corporate independence is by recognizing the level of interdependence that lies across functions, departments and the internal sets of teams that make up the organization. It is also paramount that executives weave the seemingly disparate sections of the company together to create a truly functional organization.
Unity leads to strategic accomplishment
Once the components of the company have been unified, against the backdrop of respect, collaboration and accountability, the company can then be considered independent. It is independent in that it can better weather the storms and gale force winds of the environment it operates in with an increased degree of impunity.
The organization I was a part of at one time in my career decided that it was going do something about the slow delivery times of our technology projects via large scale reorganization. Senior leadership emphasized new processes without emphasizing the interdependency between functions. The result is that project timelines went from bad to worse and the organization reverted to the old hierarchy and processes. What was neglected was the interdependence between functions such as contracting and legal and the need to address the bottlenecks these understaffed departments inadvertently caused project completion timelines.
The solution to the Gordian knot that is the pursuit and attainment of independence lies in patient dependence and, by the same token, independence in thought should be valued as highly as healthy interdependence amongst organizational relationships.
Questions to Consider:
Is it your experience that your strategic efforts start off enthusiastically with a thrust of innovative ideas only to watch those efforts dwindle and yield mixed results?
Do you champion freedom of thought without the same level of enthusiasm on the need for increased interdependence? Or are both inadvertently left out of the corporate message?