Purpose of a Hierarchy

What is the purpose of a hierarchy? The answer to that question seems to be highly correlated with the health and efficacy of an organization. Generally speaking, one of two perspectives tends to prevail.

For many, the purpose of a hierarchy is to confer power and prestige. People strive to ascend the hierarchy because they hope to enjoy the promised rewards. They seek not only the financial bounty of a bigger title but also the psychic returns. They relish the thought of being more respected and admired with an elevated rank. They pine for the prerogative of having others do their bidding.

For others, the purpose of a hierarchy is to distribute responsibility. They find it hard to separate the interests of the community from the legitimate aims of any individual within it. They believe each role has an obligation to drive maximum impact, regardless of formal authority. Every position is like a fractal node — a shape with essentially the same properties as any other but at a different scale. Higher roles have the advantage of more workforce leverage, but all are accountable to the mission. In theory, an entry-level employee can be a better leader than an executive if the former advances the mission more thoughtfully and effectually.

The first model empowers only some people in the hierarchy while the second empowers all. The first creates artificial barriers between colleagues while the second promotes clean and direct communication. The first is more common when there's a lack of clarity around collective purpose, and the second is more common when it's crystal clear to everyone what needs to be done.

Bertrand Russell, the late Nobel Prize-winning philosopher, once observed that “in every organization there are two purposes: one, the ostensible purpose for which the organization exists; the other, to increase the power of its officials.” His point, I suppose, is that these are co-existing realities. It's never the case of only one or the other. But there's usually a dominant spirit or central tendency one can feel and observe.

Patrick Lencioni, in a cheesy but illustrative tale about leadership called The Motive, draws a distinction between 'reward-centered' and 'responsibility-centered' leadership. These are helpful terms for evaluating organizational health. When the balance of energy tilts toward positional leverage and political posturing, when competence and merit become subordinate to these dynamics, it's usually a warning sign. The healthiest organizations put purpose and principle above all.