Think about this scenario: a nurse criticises one of the consultants for not having handled a young patient gently. The consultant defends himself but the nurse tells him off and storms out of the room. Those witnessing the exchange are left wondering – did this discussion really had to happen, openly or at all?
We all know of someone who feels voicing concerns is disrespectful. Knowing that both individuals as well as principles can be challenged leaves some people overwhelmed with feelings of insecurity. We can all relate to environments where someone raising concerns is perceived as ‘rocking the boat’. Spending time with the team at FMLM, I am encouraged to appreciate and promote a flattened hierarchy, yet I wonder if having one does actually help when raising concerns? While we live in an age of transparency and accountability, I am sure there are still dignitaries wondering why the Prime Minister needed to declare his tax returns. What has become of the world?
So, what is a flattened hierarchy meant to achieve? It is supposed to help make team members - of all grades - approachable and speed up effective communication and delivery as a whole unit. Yet, I can see why some would feel insecure because of it. For some, being at the top of their tribe has led them to stop listening and, in changing times, relearning this skill demands more work than simply gravitating towards their natural comfort zone.
As far as I understand, a flattened hierarchy does not mean disregarding a person’s credibility, whether they are in a clinical role or not. What it does mean is that all team members are present’ in the system and participate for the good of it. We should have sufficient trust in each other to feel unafraid of sharing our shortcomings and areas of concern. Admitting to our mistakes should provide opportunities to grow and improve rather than create a culture of reprisal.
Imagine the workplace devoid of fear, ambiguity, low standards and inflated egos; we can achieve this!
