The more ‘command-and-control’ you practice, the less control you actually have and the more you’ll have to command. In today’s organisational life, there is little room for the ‘and’ between the words ‘command’ and ‘control’. If anything, it is ‘command and be a slave to it’. Lose control and you will actually gain more control.

In today’s business environment, to lose control actually means having more control. If ‘nuclei of control’ are scattered all over the organisation and the company functions well, that is a clear sign that there is no need for a central ‘command and control’. It is also an indication of distributed independence, of trust in people’s capabilities spread across the organisation. Although the days when Woolworths’ staff had uniforms without pockets (to make sure they didn’t steal) are long gone, the days where individual employees and teams don’t have much room to decide themselves (as they may make the wrong decisions) have not.

Command and control management is intellectually dismissed by many who are convinced of its inefficiency and waste. But rational understanding is not necessarily the same as emotional integration. There are many different ways in which you can exercise command and control… and you might be doing it even if you say you don’t. The following are just a few examples that I frequently see in my consulting work:

• Excessive ‘reporting back’ points included in a project.
• Too many reviews and rehearsals of presentations.
• Pre-approval of certain types of communication outside official reporting lines.
• Decision-making powers accumulated at the top of the organisation chart.
• Devolved responsibility, but with little budgetary room for execution.
• Decision points centralised around formal meetings.

As I said, the paradox of control is that the more you let go of it, the more control you will have as there will be several ‘points of control’ scattered across the organisation. If you think this is something you can’t afford, then that already tells you a lot about the kind of organisation you have.

The way to think about changing this is simple: what can I do to control less? What kind of changes - perhaps structural, perhaps people-related - would I have to make in order to distribute control? If I want to lose control, I will have to trust other people in the organisation who will be sharing the control. What would prevent me from doing so? Is it the people I have? That may be part of the problem, but the problem could also be you.

Starting on this road entails first mapping the areas where control could be devolved at some risk and then taking some more risks. Here are some ideas:

• Push down decision making. Review decision points and delegate one to a lower level every month until you have lost most of the control. Remember, this should be the goal and you’ll need to change a few things so that it is possible.
• Allocate budgetary responsibilities to groups or teams. In some product development organisations, budget is still very centralised so project teams are merely administrators. To push down budgetary responsibilities and ‘lose some control’ to the project leader, for example, could make those teams far more accountable and perhaps more business focused.
• Suppress monthly reports. Cascading monthly reports down the hierarchical lines is a waste. Ask everybody to post highlights of their progress online (intranet, team room, wiki, etc.) and to do so in real time. If nothing else, you will be removing an artificial internal clock.

Losing control is disruptive and powerful. It can spread virally by devolving and sharing accountabilities. But it needs to start somewhere…

Have a let-go plan and roll it out over weeks or months. Watch the sky, it won’t fall.

Aim at controlling nothing; this is the only way to be in control.

In positions of leadership: more backstage, less front line.

Delegate until you get really scared. If it’s not scary, it’s not radical enough. Try harder.

Copyright © - Leandro Herrero - 2008