Personnel Architecture: Horizontal or Vertical?
Is your company’s personnel architecture vertical or horizontal in relation to key clients? In general, there are two different approaches to structuring an organization in terms of who has direct contact with clients.
One way, we call vertical. It’s when there is typically one person through whom all client contact is directed. It could be an account exec, owner, head of a division or lead on a project. It’s one point person that manages and nurtures the connection. They “own” that relationship. All communication comes to the point person and is then disseminated. Assignments, notes on deliverables or any other feedback from the client come through this one person and is shared with coordinators, associates, skilled workers and any others on the team as needed.
Another style is horizontal. This form is when a key client has direct communication with any number of people involved in the work. In a creative agency, for example, there could be direct contact with a producer, designer, writer, editor and even coordinators.
The argument for a more vertical approach is that the company is less exposed to any number of people leaving the company and taking that client relationship with them. NDA’s and non-competes only go so far.
There are many arguments for the horizontal structure. For one, there is a greater sense of ownership on the part of those involved in the work. When someone has the opportunity to hear feedback and engage directly with a client, there is less of a chance that something will get lost in translation. When there is a greater sense of ownership, the quality of work is typically maximized. From a strategic standpoint, if the company were to lose one of these individuals to the competition, there are still 3 or 4 others with whom the client is comfortable and has a working rapport. So, there is some insurance from being too dependent on any one person. It does take some trust and even a willingness to let someone screw up. But the benefits typically outweigh the risks.
Is your organization more vertical or horizontal? What we have seen is that companies with a horizontal personnel architecture have more vibrant, collaborative cultures. This isn’t coincidence. At least, we don’t think so. What do you think? Leave us a comment and let us know.
Poetess former aviatrix, journalist w/solid public speaking experience. Goodwill ambassador for the U.S. at Britain's "Going Blue" foundation.
6 年So here comes an unqualified comment, as am not a lawyer. I can only speak from experience at British Airways, where a few years back we had both a horizontal ( all crew, flight and cabin, ground staff, engineering etc) and ?simultaneously a vertical personnel architecture. It worked brilliantly.? Mainstream, all crew, flight deck with cabin crew were trained to maintain flawless communication with one another and all treated equally to ensure maximum safety, ie cabin crew were encouraged to pick up the phone on day one and report whatever unusual incident they happened to see were a wing on fire or the like ( at other airlines, this was Boeing's general training, there were hardly ever any incidences at BA) and not be too shy as the old hierarchy had led to often fatal accidents in the past with other airlines. So to prevent this, "CRM", Crew Resource Management started and is practiced and trained up this day at any airline flying any type of Boeing. At the same time, though, back in the day, the communication channels to the board and CEO of BA worldwide was directly accessible to all employees. An Australian, he wrote a very likable column every week in our crew news, and when one would write him a letter, praising colleagues, asking for extraordinary unpaid leave after the airline industry picked up again in the 2000's and no more was available, he'd answer each letter personally and addressed whatever concern there was. Needless to say, the employee satisfaction was through the roof during this time.?