|The Challenge Network www.chforum.org|
Briefly, I think that there are three kinds of power relations within management team.
The first can be symbolised by a triangle: the CEO is close to the deity, and everyone else does what they are told by him or her. This style is prevalent in the US an din owner-managed companies. When the CEO is right, it is swift, efficient and focused; but when direction is wrong, nothing resists the plunge into the abyss.
The second can be thought of as over-lapping tiles. Each tile represents the area of expertise of any one board member. There is some overlap, but essentially each is the guardian of their speciality. In theory, they play together as a team, but in practice they may well act as barons, defending their territory against all comers. This is a style that is very common in Britain, and the most frequent stable outcome is for "you to watch your patch and I'll watch mine." People fight their colleagues more than they unite to resist the competition.
The third model can be thought of as a nest of looped arrows, each representing processes. That is, the board has applied process re-engineering to itself, and has defined the activities in which it has to engage. These in turn define the custodianship of each of these processes, and define the skill needs of board members. This model is more typical of some Asian economies, although many prefer the "CEO as god" approach.
In addition, boards have three areas of focus: on what is happening in the line, on those things which matter only when considered as aggregates - such as portfolio issues, for example - and on renewal. It is a rule that senior staff should focus on the sorts of questions appropriate to their level, although many choose to relive former glories by meddling in line issues. However, where interaction with the business is needed, this should be done in ways which specify deliverables, not the mechanisms of delivery.