3 ms·

> By far the most common way is chain of command, which means that you always flow communication through your manager. The problem with this approach is that, w

> By far the most common way is chain of command, which means that you always flow communication through your manager. The problem with this approach is that, while it serves to enhance the power of the manager, it fails to serve the company. Is this common at a lot of companies? I've only worked in one company and despite its many flaws I've never hesitated to contact the relevant person directly for anything, regardless of hierarchy and geography. I do make sure to keep my manager in the loop for anything that will take up a significant portion of my time. So he knows I'm not slacking off :P

losteverything 9y ago
<Is this common at a lot of companies? Everyone I've been in: Fortune 5, small biz, govt monopoly, r&d lab, retail One example: a legal department vs. Sales&marketing. Legal believes they can veto marketing decisions. A fuzzy plan to use CPMI was initiated by marketing. Legal said "you must stop" Marketing said "buzz off, you Legal, are in the 'advice' business. We exercise our right to ignore it." Several members in sales marketing kept in close contact with legal... Before and after... And were quickly transferred. Btw, the decision went to the BofD who naturally gave no reason to stop.