There have been volumes said about the benefits and woes of centralized decision-making. An equal amount has been written touting the benefits and woes of decentralized decision-making.
I think it is safe to say that in different situations one decision-making approach is better than another. I would also maintain that there is space for both to exist within the same organization.
It is up to you to decide what needs to be command-center driven and what can be decided on at lower levels. And then, you must communicate this to your teams.
Once established, you are in a position to create a collaborative team.
When you have a collaborative team, you foster lateral communication among team members and across teams. This is especially important among the lower ranks of employees because it shows you value and trust their work.
Additionally, it increases the likelihood and speed of innovations.
In a collaborative team, assignments can be shared across roles and even divisions. Handoffs between phases of work become more fluid because communication is less viscous. Fewer details get left behind that are critical to successful completion of downstream tasks.
A lot of times we think of our team as the individuals that do the same thing as me. I think it is time to think of the team as the people I work around, who feed me work, and who receives the product I create.
Creating this environment does not mean there is zero oversight from management. Many times, the existing management channels will be the best path to communicate through.
By focusing on peer-to-peer communication and work transfer, you will find new efficiencies in your work processes, which allows you to hone your timelines, and ship product earlier.
Contact us to learn more about one way we are redefining the team structure for the pharmaceutical industry.