Pods, thought partners and flat structures

Great things in business are never done by one person. They're done by a team of people

Steve Jobs

With Passionfruit announcing our raise this week , it’s brought me to thinking about management structures and progression. As we start to bring on more talent, the shift from a 25 person company to a 35 person company is going to be widely felt, and how we choose to structure the business now will dictate how we grow.

So the biggest question on my mind is how do we set up management structures that leave everyone feeling supported whilst still encouraging a highly autonomous working culture. Flat org structures is top of my list to explore for the Passionfruit team.

To join me on my exploration - this week we’ll be diving into:

• The benefits and drawbacks of a flat structure
• Managers as thought partners and teams as pods
• Spotlight on ‘best place to work’, Squarespace

The benefits and drawbacks of a flat structure

First of all, what do we mean by a flat org structure?

As you can see it takes out the managerial structured approach and focuses more on functions or groups of autonomous workers under only 1 manager.

Of course, with every initiative there are pros and cons, and it definitely isn’t right for every organisation - so here’s a quick outline of some of the pros and cons you might face:

Drawbacks

• Lack of managerial direction can lead to aimless idea explorations
• More people with autonomy means more people to listen to - can cause a bit of time wasting but also a power struggle
• Progression is harder to formalise within a flat org, especially for younger members that may need more guidance

Benefits

• Less room for competition and comparison within teams - happier team dynamic
• Limited sign off from seniors means projects can move quicker
• Holds accountability to a strong standard and makes it easy to spot the highest achievers/top talent
• Fewer mid-manager/leadership hires made which keeps you necessarily frugal with big salaries and unnecessary scaling of the team

Managers as thought partners and teams as pods

Something we offer at Passionfruit to our customers we call ‘Passionfruit Pods’, which is a selection of specialist marketers relevant for a particular project or brand. On thinking about flat structures it struck me that this is ultimately what it looks like - a pod of specialists in their field, working together for a shared goal. Or in other words - an individual contributor (IC).

Absolutely loved the Dan Hockenmaier post (linked below) explaining how the future of work is IC. But from a team structure perspective I think employing this pod system is a great way of empowering individuals to work together, bringing in different specialist knowledge areas where necessary. Pods of ICs will help to guide this horizontal set up as there is no hierarchy of knowledge.

However if you’ve got ICs what does this mean for the managers that need to exist? What we often use at Passionfruit is the term ‘thought partners’ to describe our manager relationships. This starts with a problem solving session on Monday mornings between you as a manager and each of your team, and then moving forward if there’s any support or guidance needed we call it a thought partner exercise. This leaves room for individuals to operate autonomously from their manager and remain accountable, but with the support from a thought partner to reach their goals quicker.

As a thought partner, rather than a manager, it takes the weight out of the day to day pressure of management and focuses instead on genuinely impacting individuals creatively when called upon. For both it leaves more of an impression of equality, being a partner in their work as opposed to in charge of it. This to me is what makes all of the fundamentals of a good manager, but in a more horizontal approach.

???Company spotlight ??

A business that is consistently voted one of the best places to work, year after year, and grew from startup to IPO within 10 years.

Squarespace did this, largely, through a flat, open and creative organisational culture. They truly believe that in order to be successful, they must remove all barriers to positive communication - which is embraced through the horizontal structure they pioneer daily, as well as a supportive and educational measures.

Here’s a few initiatives they’ve rolled out to support the cause:

• Allowing people to work on what they are actually passionate about - setting their own success indicators
• Entry level employees directly communicate with c-suite - everyones voice is heard
• Guest lectures program to help with individual learning
• Equal number of direct reports per manager - every employee gets an equal level of support
• Mix up the seating plan - so you’re not sticking teams that work together directly together
• A particularly beautiful workspace to foster creativity
• Celebrating individual creativity and wins across ICs throughout the company, removing any group formations

What do you think? Could you make your organisation more horizontal with some of the above tips?

The best partnerships aren’t dependent on a mere common goal but a shared path of equality, desire, and no small amount of passion

Sarah Maclean

What we’re reading

• The future of work is IC
• Is there a solution for flat structures not working ?
• What the design team at Squarespace say about horizontal structures