How can you break down silos and turf wars between departments?

I cannot emphasize the importance of a shared common vision enough. A team that understands its purpose, and the bigger picture, tends to work better together. Also building diverse teams with complementing skillsets, where there is room to learn and contribute, enhances collaboration and mutual respect. Finally, clear communication and transparency by the senior leaders and people of authority in the organization w.r.t. leadership's vision, goals, accountability (this is key!), intentions and strategy helps in better clarity and leaves no room for "turf wars" or politics as they call it.

I think there is an opportunity to look at this problem differently in terms of what is the root cause of silos and turf wars in cross functional teams? Egos, different ideas about the importance of the exercise, competing priorities and unhealthy competing for resources can all derail a cross functional team from the start. Few cross functional teams seem to set the intention of investing in each other and the team to function effectively. I believe a cross functional team should approach working together like a band going into the studio. The goal after making the "record" is to be a better band.

Having a clear defined acceptance criteria at the beginning is a key to avoid any turf wars. Make sure that you define the acceptance criteria for each stage of the process. Reviewing against an acceptance criteria agreed up-on by teams will result in less friction, as you are not making decisions based on your comfort/favoritism or what you feel it right.

You will need to find the value of the team's work for each stakeholder's silo/department. The value for the company or the vision may not be enough. The accomplishment needs to be personal to that stakeholder and team.

I agree about aligning on a common vision, but also for cross functional teams to work across the business more effectively, they need to have the data to do so. Connecting the business systems from end to end can help with solutions such as www.Wrxflo.com that can connect up all the systems across the business for one source of truth. From my experience, teams require updates and information cross functionally and rely on others for the data that is required to perform their role. Friction can occur when it’s not received in a timely fashion. Investment in this area can have positive impact on teams working more effectively, leading to time saved on daily tasks which will ultimately lead to teams collaborating more effectively.

Align all the silos towards business OKRs could be the first way to have an alogned common vision and ground for all silos. Identify the bottleneck in achieving this vision. Understand the rootcause - lack of bandwidth to support other silos or ego or lack of understanding their motivation towards the common goal. Motivate silos to help other teams by highlighting the importance of collaboration to achieve the common goal.

One of your first steps when bringing together a cross-functional team should always be to clearly define success - in a way that is measurable. If the goal is subjective then each team member will naturally define it for themselves based on their frame of reference. Setting clear success criteria provides a "true north" for the team as they navigate how to achieve it. This seems obvious but is often overlooked or worse assumed.

Aligning on a common vision is essential, but 💡 additional aspects must be considered. First, it's crucial to determine if a specific individual is breaking down silos, as they can influence the entire team. Second, shared goals must be prioritized. At times, it's acceptable not to meet a specific KPI if it benefits the broader company. Lastly, collaboration is key. Joint discussion tables allow understanding from all viewpoints and moving forward together. True cohesion emerges when efforts are combined and work harmoniously towards a common goal.

As a leader, the paramount task for him/her is create a common vision across the teams / team members. In view of current scenarios of any industry collaboration is unavoidable wherein it is the crux in achieving goals. As a leader one needs to generate healthy competition across cross functional team and create a vision that all teams are heading towards a single goal.

One thing I’ve found helpful in kicking off this exercise, is to jointly define the ‘Why’: the key reason for the org to exist in the first place. It’s the problem space that the team is here to address. It’s the customer’s pain points which whatever product, solution or service are going to be built, should be on everyone’s top of mind every single day. Once that is aligned and agreed, then the next steps should be already easier and faster to align on: what’s the best way to achieve value for customers, partners and owners given the constraints and current state of things? What like of prioritization should items get on the roadmap and work plans? Also, some north start metrics can be useful for keeping track of the course of action.

Please note that trust is not something everyone gives overnight. It is even harder to foster for remote teams. If you come across resistance, be forthcoming to the stakeholder. You may even want to ask him what it may take to gain that trust.

Trust & mistrust - begin and end with uncertainty of human mind. Identity these uncertainties, club them and make them the core of your strategy. Genuine concerns displayed by leadership will build trust automatically. Do seek suggestions to give the members a feel of genuine concern. Interactions with members dispel uncertainties & forge strong bonds…..

Paula Raven is correct. Trust takes time to build and can be even harder with remote teams. As a remote leader, I have found it's faster for me to build trust with team members than for them to build trust with each other. It takes patience, time, and constant reinforcement of the optimal behaviors.

It's not just about trust and respect, but a blend of factors that finish on that. The key is for the entire team to share the same vision, know the goal, and genuinely desire to achieve it together. Without this shared purpose, there's no real team. And without a cohesive team, building trust becomes a daunting task. Every team member must have a clear role, and all should be aware of it. When each individual understands their expected contribution and sees how it fits into the broader goal, a strong foundation for mutual trust and respect is established.

Do you need to build trust and respect in your diverse cross functional teams 1. Be Authentic; expect authenticity 2. Empower your team 3. Clear ownership and accountability 4. Promote and create collaborative tools like MS teams etc. 5. Use Recognition badge embedded in teams to promote recognitions as part of recognition moments in cross functional team meetings. 6. Most importantly establish all the above as rules through your team engagement

Trust and respect among team members encourages open and honest communication, making it easier to share knowledge and resources across departments. Members prioritize collective success over individual or departmental successes which leads to higher engagement in brainstorming ideas and daily tasks.

Creating a space for reflection and respectful truth telling must be established. Teams help create the rules of enjoyment, the processes underpinning it and the scope of focus for it to have meaning. It also implies a level of responsibility across the entire team. Truth telling is vital to organisational being well and addressing the success bias that stops project growth and people development. When people know they can discuss what is not working, they can breathe and bring their best human to the workplace.

The role of the leader - direct or indirect - within a department or cross functional - is to ensure that a team works in optimum operating conditions. One of the key building blocks of this optimum condition is to watch out the trust and respect amongst team members. It can be tiny signs like an email without follow up irritating one, someone talking too much in meetings and shutting down others… Do not forget: look carefully at the bad behaviors of your top performers ! If you let them perform in a way that is damaging trust, respect or other essential value for a team to function, you as a leader gives credit to this be the standard.

It is more complicated to achieve than say. Depending on the company's culture, these tools can help, but no magic wand exists. If your company culture is adversarial or has a hierarchical solid management, you may need to consider other options. I have many examples, but surface it to say that sometimes Trust and Respect are too high a bar (at least for short-term initiatives). The answer for me is gaining agreement that we will get blame/credit as a team, and everyone WILL get something out of it. As a cross-functional team lead, you must address problems between the team members (especially if they have a toxic relationship). I have had to pull people out because they couldn't be professional.

Most people likely aim to do well at work, yet fostering a culture of openness, honesty, and feedback remains elusive. A key reason might be the general discomfort with conflict, especially in giving feedback to superiors. This often leads to the creation of 'fiefdoms' in organizations, where personal gain trumps collective success. A possible solution? Rethink how we measure success. Consider evaluating success based on an individual's Net Positive Impact on the team and organization, where negative impacts, multiplied by three, are deducted from positive contributions. This approach could shift focus from personal gain to positive organizational impact.

Make sure there are clear guidelines and scope for how collaborations are to take place before starting. This will help manage team expectations. Also agree on what collaboration really is. Technology is a platform and only a piece of the puzzle. Collaboration is also a learned skill so there is likely to be a level of capability building needed across the teams. Only when there is consistency and commitment to the actions needed will you see any real outcome and impact.

I would like to start with Conway's law which I like and it states Any organization that designs a system (defined broadly) will produce a design whose structure is a copy of the organization's communication structure. — Melvin E. Conway In other words if we would like to have products leveraging and panning cross organization we need to enable communication. Another thing which has worked for us is by creating smaller self sufficient teams to avoid silos.

Make sure all teams are speaking the same language. Oftentimes, words have different meanings from team to team. Some examples of words that often get misconstrued from team to team are: Campaign, Deliverable, Banner, Test, Conversion; even the term Milestone may have a different meaning on different teams. Taking time at the start to define key terms will go a long way to helping all teams collaborate and work toward common goals.

Structure, structure, structure ! All the tools available are great to do so. « A fool with a tool is still a fool » Without rules on what to place, where, how (to update), this can turn into a maze within few weeks of a project!

Living in times where digital technology helps to be more collaborative is key whereas I would still emphasise to have both virtual and F2F meetings part of Communication strategy for effective communication and collaboration.

Diversity is most effective when the positive ways in which people differ are emphasized. If you build a diverse team, but people don't realize they are diverse, they can still succumb to groupthink.

How are you going to embrace and support diversity and inclusion cross teams? It's key you know what actions you'll need to take before you start and how you want to communicate this to various stakeholders. This action opens up a conversation with your teams plus it can be a opportunity for their input and advice. If there are challenges and roadblocks you are aware of make sure you have a plan to address these early on. Sweat the small stuff up front so it doesn't become the big stuff. This also requires input from teams as they will have an awareness at times that you don't. In terms of what is happening day to day. Be open minded and actively engage in getting these insights from the front line before bringing people together.

A leader who put together a team that is not diverse is not set for success ( and lazy 😉) Of course it is easy to manage people who thinks in the same way as one does, with the same background, same region, same school same holidays destination… Is it fun ? Is it challenging for a leader to become a better leader ? Is it a benefit for a project? 3* no.

Leverage Diversity and promoting inclusivity in very useful ways below: 1. Find and Highlight strengths of each other 2. how each member can close the loop by their unique strengths: skills and experiences that can create an impact project. 3. Showcase the success through the above again and again and again......

I don't use the word failure. You either win or you learn. It's important that there are regular ways for teams to stop, reflect and do some serious thinking together. Asking what worked and why is key. But even more importantly what didn't go to plan and what were the lessons learnt? Where is the opportunity to do different and where do you make a start? These needs to be weekly reflections where there is clear actions and next steps for everyone to deliver. In time teams won't fear when something didn't go to plan. It becomes a normal part of doing business and evolving.

I agree with Ali Uren. I don't like the word failure. Things that don't go to plan are learning opportunities. We must be willing to try new things, make mistakes, and learn from them. Then, create actions around the learnings to embed and sustain change.

Be genuine as a leader when celebrating and taking into consideration of the regional differences of your team member. A shout out celebration in the USA is slightly louder that a shout out for a French, Dutch or German. Unless you like to see eyebrows lifting :) About failure. A failure is not a walk of shame. The leader is key here to foster a safe environment so that failure can be openly discussed. Better than waiting for the failure to occur, implement pit-stops. Like in Formula 1, the racing driver would not finish the race without pit stops. The pit stops help to check all aspects of the team functioning - including the mishap’s - before they become too big.

Celebrate Success and failure learnings: 1. Use common periodical meetings and forums to celebrate successes but most importantly also share learnings from failure 2. Create Cultural moment as part of every meeting to start with: small Recognitions or learnings as air happens for failures 2. Give opportunities and tools and act as a motivator to give credit to successes for your team members and take ownership for making them realise that failure is a stepping stone for success.

Conflict is necessary for growth. A healthy team or organization embraces this by creating a forum or structure in which to have safe and healthy conflict. A few techniques I've experienced are: Align on dashboards for review each session to create transparency. If you know your dirty laundry is coming out, you turn your energy from hiding it to fixing it. Establish a common language and expectation of conflict - "Thank you for your challenge" then reward its use. Opposing view points make the end product stronger. It only hurts feelings if it doesn't feel safe.

When there are two or more people involved either in a work situation or in personal life , there is bound to be a disagreement as everyone is different and unique . However , individuals need to understand that the team has a common goal and learn to leave personal egos and biases aside and come forward for transparent and open communication with an intention for a win-win situation. The mindset should be that the team should win and not prioritize individuals opinions snd priorities. As an adaptation of the Thomas Kilman model ,the best way to handle team conflicts would be to collaborate better than competing or avoiding .

Being a servant leader also involves sometimes being the salomonic judge...this means that issues and conflicts can be debated/argued and analyzed to death but like Salomon you should have the authority/respect/mandate to make a decision and it will affect one side or another (or many for that matter) but sometimes having the respect of the teams allows you to address the issue/conflict (note I did not say resolve!) by making the most value add decision. The recipients may not like it but will respect it knowing you know you impacted them and if it arises again for something different you may then leverage past decision accordingly..

💡Collaboration starts when we have things in common, learn to first seek the common grounds💡 To break down silos and turf wars between departments, it's crucial to seek common ground and share values that prioritize collaboration and mutual success. Open communication, fostering a culture of transparency, and emphasizing shared goals can facilitate understanding and bridge divides. Encouraging cross-functional teamwork, recognizing individual contributions, and celebrating collective achievements help build trust and promote a collaborative environment across departments.

Once you have alignment, which is a basic requirement, ensure incentives/bonuses are weighted heavily on the corporate, versus individual goals. Then, tactically facilitate a basic education of “walking in your shoes”, where each executive or leader is required to articulate the others’ goals and responsibilities in a workshop setting.

Another way could be to make space for informal interactions at a cross-functional team level in the beginning. This will allow everyone to connect at a more human level. Doing this early helps to find ways out of conflicts much easier. I've seen this approach can help address problems even before they occur.

Silos and turf wars happen for various reasons. One thing that has consistently worked in stopping them is 'truing' back to the scope of responsibility [for each person/group] as defined by a company's delivery methodology and the stakeholders for the initiative. Having this information documented and available when people/teams try to over reach makes it that much easier to end the chaos.

Three additional ideas i’ve seen in action to foster a stronger cross-functional collaboration between competing divisions: 1. Design common and mutually agreed KPI scorecards By aligning on mutual KPI and measurement of progress towards these competing goals a better picture emerges of what really matters for each division. 2. Create a common plan and regularly review progress towards common agreed objectives This helps to address the identified outstanding issues and promotes collaboration opportunities towards these goals. 3. Seek synergies and a win-win partnership during interactions Over time, with a better clarity about goals, processes and working style, on both sides, the relationship can strengthen, mature and grow.

Physically co-locating teams working on shared objectives is a game-changer. Imagine: spontaneous chats sparking new ideas, quick problem-solving huddles, and a shared sense of purpose. This proximity boosts communication, builds empathy across departments, and unlocks a whole new level of collaboration.

Tracy R., I agree. My organization uses RACIs to determine who is accountable, responsible, or consulted. As I read this article, I thought that going back to the RACI to clarify stakeholder roles is vital to alignment.

The Turf Wars between teams have been there for ages. Most common factors that causes these issues are - 1. Misalignment of Objectives 2. Lack of Goal Orientation 3. Difference or Lack of Understanding Between Department Heads 4. Missing SoPs for each Team. I'll explain the one I'm more experienced with - 4. Missing SoPs for each Team - In most of the cases SoPs are either missing or misaligned with respect to the other teams. Ex. - Customer Support TAT is 24 Hours but Tech Team TAT is 48 hours. Imagine a customer having issues will be told to wait 24 hours but the Tech Team may not be able to reply in the stipulated timeline. Thus the SoPs need to be well aligned with other Teams and Departments before circulation.