Cross-Functional Collaboration

As the economy reverts back from the 2021 hiring boom, companies are increasingly removing middle managers in favor of one leader for very large teams. For example, as opposed to marketing being led by one middle manager, outside sales by another manager, customer support by another manager, and customer success by another manager, many companies are opting to remove the layer of middle management and have one leader in charge of all of those functions without any leaders in between.

This has led to a major need for companies to increase their focus on helping their employees effectively communicate and collaborate across functions to achieve desired business outcomes. While somewhat redundant, there was still a lot of information handled by those middle managers that is now the responsibility of the employee.

Why have companies opted to remove middle managers in the first place?

The simple answer is lack of perceived value.

The logic behind creating a layer of middle management is that the guidance of a manager of a smaller team that owns and is fully accountable for their outcomes will be greater than if there was one manager for multiple functions within the organization.

This logic is sound if:

This logic doesn’t make sense when:

For example, let’s say we are a recruiting company in 2021 and the market is hot. All the outside sales team needs is a pulse to close deals. There was a process that the middle manager leading outside sales followed to maintain a base level of competence but because sales are coming in from everywhere, bad habits are overlooked.

Fast forward to 2023. The market has completely dried up, and the outside sales team is really struggling to meet their goals. The CEO is begging and pleading for his team to close more deals. The outside sales team blames the economy and all these other factors for why their numbers are down. But in reality, the middle manager in charge of the outside sales team hasn’t been holding her team accountable to the standard business development process they have found to be tried and true. And now she’s out of practice at holding her team accountable, and the team is out of practice taking hard advice from their manager. This is a recipe for failure. 

The CEO then asks the middle managers in other departments to help pickup the slack in sales. He implores his customer success team to focus on upselling current customers. The customer success middle manager says that she is up for the task. She and her team have devised a plan for trying to turn open support tickets and queries into opportunities for upselling. 

The plan looks great, but they run into a brick wall with customer support. The customer support middle manager is incentivized to close support tickets as quickly as possible, and this clashes with the overarching business goals of upselling to current clients. To resolve this, the customer success manager has a 1:1 with the customer support manager. The customer support manager knows that him closing support tickets hurts the customer success managers goal of upselling the existing customers and closing more deals, but mentions that “his hands are tied” because in order for him to achieve his end of year bonus, he needs his time to closed ticket ratio to be under a certain level. They are at an impasse.

The outside sales manager isn’t effectively holding her team accountable, the customer support manager is only focused on his end of year bonus for the metrics he is accountable for, and the customer success manager is stressed out because her team is putting in overtime to try to pick up the slack for the outside sales team but keeps running into hurdles from the support team.

Executive teams look at this situation and have determined…screw it! Let’s remove middle managers and have one overarching manager over a wide group of people so they can adjust incentives effectively and ensure everyone is rowing in the same direction. The executive team can’t guarantee that this new model will be any more effective, but they can guarantee that it will cost a whole lot less to not have all of these middle managers than to have them. 

Their logic is that if it isn’t working with middle managers right now, why keep paying for them?

In order to achieve effective cross-functional communication and collaboration, there needs to be:

If companies cannot effectively achieve all four of these points, they will continue to struggle to achieve effective cross-functional communication and collaboration.

Moore's Circle of Conflict is a powerful tool for understanding the underlying causes of conflicts in professional environments. This model, developed by Christopher Moore, categorizes conflict sources into 5 different areas: data, values, relationships, structure, and interests. Each of these 5 types of conflict gives insight into why arguments or disagreements arise and how they can best be addressed. For managers, understanding how to categorize and address types of conflict is paramount for building a beneficial team culture. Understanding the Circle of Conflict enables managers to make strategic decisions in effective resolution within a team.  

Both conflict management and relationship management are paramount to building successful, productive teams in the workplace. Effective conflict management allows leaders to use constructive resolution techniques, mitigating impacts on morale and productivity as a result of said conflict. However, the most crucial aspect of mitigating and resolving conflict is promoting active listening, enabling managers to strategically address issues. When resolved with strategic solutions, team members can become more innovative, and collaboration may be improved across team members. Leaders also play a vital role in preparing the next generation of leaders to adequately address conflicts. 

 

Relationship management, on the other hand, focuses on fostering mutual trust, respect, and open communication within the team. Building a team culture based on trust will promote transparency and honesty in resolution. Strong relationships between team members or direct reports and managers will encourage constructive conflict where individuals feel supported to share their ideas and contribute and disagreements are easily solved. Effective relationship management will enable psychological safety within a team and promote balance. Conflict and relationship management skills enhance individual performance and drive collective success, as teams work in harmony toward common goals.

Data conflicts occur when there are misunderstandings or disputes over information or lack thereof. In a professional setting, data conflicts are common and can arise from miscommunications, incorrect data interpretations, or the absence of vital information. For example, if two departments are working together and have different data sources or data interpretations, disagreements are almost inevitable. 

When leaders are equipped to recognize a data conflict, they can prevent misunderstandings from escalating. The primary strategies for managers addressing data conflicts are clarifying information, enhancing transparency, and potential preventative training. Specifically, clarifying information could utilize leaders holding a meeting to go over any questions or disputes, with full access to data and information. To enhance transparency, leaders should work to provide as much information upfront, including how data is collected and shared. Finally, preventative training on data literacy or something similar may benefit teams repeatedly struggling for data conflicts. Addressing data conflicts effectively reduces tensions and enhances decision-making, ensuring everyone operates from the same factual basis.

Value conflicts are rooted in differences in beliefs or personal principles, such as ethics, cultural values, or social norms. For instance, one team member may value innovation and risk-taking, while another prioritizes stability and proven methods. 

Leaders who recognize value conflicts can play a pivotal role in guiding discussions that respect everyone’s beliefs. Key strategies for addressing value conflicts are setting common ground, promoting diversity, and creating open communication paths for disagreements. Value conflicts revolve around disagreements of morals or beliefs. To mitigate, promote conversations that find common ground and compromise for similar beliefs. Additionally, policies and actions that promote diversity and inclusion will bring outside perspectives that can impact value conflicts. Acknowledging diverse perspectives can help find similarities in values and resolve conflicts. Finally, creating open communication paths for conversation between team members provides an opportunity for individuals to share, feeling respected and understood. Addressing value conflicts with empathy not only improves relationships but also fosters a workplace where diversity of thought is valued.

Relationship conflicts typically stem from personal issues between colleagues, often due to misunderstandings, communication issues, or historical grievances. These conflicts can be deeply personal and can quickly disrupt team dynamics if left unaddressed. 

Leaders can tackle relationship conflicts by encouraging open communication, promoting team building, and additional training on conflict resolution. Creating opportunities for team members to share their perspectives and experiences is paramount to resolving relationship conflicts. Encouraging mutual respect and team building a great tools to aid in mitigating the conflict. When people feel connected to their co-workers, they are less likely to have serious conflicts that are beyond their ability to resolve. Finally, conflict resolution training can be a great tool for preventing relationship conflict, and equipping leaders with necessary tools to promote harmony across a team. When leaders proactively address relationship conflicts, they create a cohesive, positive environment, reinforcing a culture where collaboration can flourish despite personal differences.

Structural conflicts are caused by organizational structures, such as unclear job roles, power imbalances, or resource constraints. For example, if a team feels overwhelmed due to a lack of support staff or unclear role definitions, tension is likely to increase. 

Leaders can resolve structural conflicts by clarifying responsibilities and addressing power dynamics. Ensuring each individual understands the requirements and expectations of their role and how it impacts others can clarify and prevent misunderstandings. Accordingly, addressing power dynamics can be a great tool for managers to mitigate power differences as they relate to conflict in the office. Together, these tools serve as prime resources to strategically address structural conflicts in the workplace. By addressing structural conflicts head-on, leaders can ensure a fairer workplace where systems and processes support rather than hinder productivity.

Interest conflicts arise when team members have competing personal or professional goals. For example, one employee may seek a promotion while another wants to maintain a work-life balance. These conflicts are common in goal-oriented environments and require thoughtful leadership to resolve. 

Leaders can address interest conflicts by promoting personal and organizational value alignment, and flexibility and encouraging a collaborative culture. Values alignment will create an understanding environment for both managers and their teams. By understanding individual goals, managers can find ways to align these with the company’s objectives, allowing for mutually beneficial outcomes. Flexibility will create an environment where compromise is encouraged and professionals are willing to meet in the middle. Finally, a collaborative culture will allow leaders to help team members and facilitate a productive environment moving forward. When handled effectively, interest conflicts can be opportunities for growth and innovation, as team members find creative solutions that satisfy multiple interests.

Moore's Circle of Conflict is a valuable tool for managers and executives who strive for effective conflict resolution. Improving communication and open dialogue will enable managers to efficiently resolve conflict within teams. By understanding the nature of conflicts and taking targeted actions, leaders can transform challenges into opportunities for collective growth.