Bridging Silos: Effective Cross-Functional Team Collaboration
In today’s workplace nothing gets done without cross functional collaboration. Formal authority is not the driver it used to be in years past, those days are gone when one’s title defined power and decision-making rights. Nowadays cross-functional teams, collaborative groups, shared committees, and area models have blurred and, in some cases, completely erased conventional lines of authority. Cross-functional collaborations bring together powerful capabilities of various departments in an organization like marketing, logistics, distributions, IT, engineering, and many others. These teams work collaboratively instead of sequentially, streamlining rather than hindering each other’s work. Such teams are akin to arteries of transformation in an organization’s body structure.
Organizations have become sophisticated in structure, specialized products, and services they offer to their clients, and this requires cross functionality. It is rare that all work will reside in one team, function or even a single location. This makes it imperative for us to reach across teams and geographical boundaries and become highly cross-functional. In such a scenario influence is required because unless you have a big enough title to cover all teams and functions — just authority will not cover all.
Influencing is not easy, and it takes a keen sense of planning, patience, and strategy. Cross-functional teams can be broadly defined as ‘composed of those individuals from departments within the company whose competencies are essential in achieving an optimal evaluation. Successful teams combine skills which no single individual possesses.’[1] Cross functionality requires us to reach across geographical locations and functions. In such work, we are influencing either a current partner or influencing someone who will possibly become a partner in the future. It is important to understand that it is not enough that we only collaborate to get a job done, we also need to foster meaningful interpersonal connections between members of any cross-functional team to achieve shared goals. We need to focus on interests rather than positions as there exists some confusion between the concepts of teamwork and collaboration. What makes these two different is the goal — as collaboration focuses on the interests rather than positions while teamwork is the simple act of working together on tasks with no common ground or purpose. For collaborative efforts to be successful, some of the crucial aspects are sharing of credit, devoting time and effort and prioritizing shared interests rather than individual positions.
Many consider cross-functional teams as a stop gap or temporary measure, fading away when the project or task is completed — it does not have to be this way. Companies do not invest much time and energy in the development of such ‘temporary teams.’ If these cross-functional teams were permanent, then they would fare better. Paul Leinwood (Author of How Great Leaders Transform their Organizations) has introduced the concept of ‘formal capabilities team’ which can be considered as the next progression for such teams. The teams are led by top executives with newly created job descriptions. Team members irrespective of their skill levels follow a cross-functional career, reporting to people who may not share their background but do have a common commitment to the capability and all projects associated with it (IKEA has such a group currently).
Cross-functional teams will always fare better in streamlining processes and solving complex business problems as compared to the siloed functional teams working in isolation.
Foundations of Collaboration in Cross-functional teams
The foundation of cross-functional collaboration rests on three main pillars, namely.
1. Influence
2. Knowledge
3. Flexibility
Let us explore these one by one.
Influence is how work gets done. It is perhaps the most important factor in any cross-functional team’s workplan. Influence is gained from building relationships, getting people engaged and a sense of ownership. It takes time to build influence equity and rarely happens in isolation.
It can be broken down into two major classifications, namely.
- Proactive
- In the Moment
‘Proactive’ influence building takes time and encompasses trust generation by demonstrating willingness to be influenced and building knowledge of the company. Everyday is an opportunity to build trust, equity and credibility that can then be held in store for use later.
‘In the Moment’ influence is always applied for a short-term opportunity. As can be imagined such opportunities are rare and even if you do not have the long-term proactive equity in place, you will have to really excel in the moment as when trust is not established beforehand, a highly effective dialogue is needed for that scenario.
You cannot antagonize and influence at the same time.[2]
Positional power, emotion and expertise are the main components of influence in any given situation. Not everyone has positional authority in all situations that can arise in a cross-functional team, but that shortcoming can be counteracted with emotion. When other side has the power and you have the emotion, it is possible that passion can sweep away authority when the speaker is well prepared, and the proposition is well supported. Expertise which is the third component of influence is closely linked with passion. When passion is supported by expertise in any cross-functional team setting, it can easily trump positional power.
In summary, influence is a measure of how much stake the participants have in the project and to wield it you need to master at least one of these components.
Just like influence, Knowledge takes years to build, and in any organization, the most influential people are the ones who know the organization well. You cannot influence any one in a team setting unless you have knowledge about what they do and what is their perspective about how things should be done. We need to know the realities, constraints, biases, and big picture priorities of people working in a group. ‘Your perspective is always limited by how much you know. Expand your knowledge and you will transform your mind.’[3]
Knowledge is important because in a cross-functional team, the target of your influence is probably in a different division or geographical area of the company. This means that without gaining knowledge first you cannot assume that you know the impact of what you are imposing on them, their processes, and operations. It is a prerequisite that will prepare you to answer any questions, concerns or objections that may come up — it will also convey the message that you are thinking beyond your own needs and interests. Wayne Dyer (American Author and Speaker) best said, ‘If you change the way you look at things, the things you look at change.’
Flexibility is paramount as without it no cross-functional project can succeed. To influence others, you need a certain flexibility yourself to be influenced. In such an environment, flexibility nurtures trust — the more flexible you are with someone, the more they trust you and vice versa. Flexibility and trust work in tandem with influence — the more flexible we are with someone, the more they trust you and that trust makes them more flexible towards you. Being flexible opens your mind to alternative perspectives, value of other team member’s ideas and it may well change your own mindset for the better. As celebrated author Edward De Bono truthfully proposed, ‘If you never change your mind why have one?’
If there is a history of willingness to change on your part, others will be more open to change themselves — so in essence flexibility breeds trust in addition to improving results. Alex Pentland is a professor at Sloan School of Management at MIT, she conducted research to understand how patterns of social learning work in a modern business environment. Her findings have confirmed[4] that being flexible leads to better decision making and profitable outcomes. The research gathered data on 1.6 million users of eToro, an investment site that lets day traders see and copy one another’s moves. The traders who were more flexible in their acceptance of ideas and people in their networks experienced a return on investment that was 30% higher than the return of the isolated traders. They also fared much better than the traders who were too interconnected to one group and became trapped in an ‘echo chamber’ where similar ideas kept recirculating. (“Beyond the Echo Chamber — Harvard Business Publishing Education”) According to Susan Finerty (Author of Cross-Functional Influence), ‘Being flexible is an art and there is a balance to be maintained. You cannot be overly flexible to the point that you are unreliable. If you waver too much, then people will stop trusting you — they will not jump on the train with you because they have seen you jump off mid-course too many times.’
Elements of Effective Teamwork
75% of cross-functional teams are dysfunctional[5]. Such teams are hurt by a lack of accountability, unclear governance and by their organization’s failure to prioritize the success of cross-functional projects. Research[6] indicates that cross-functional teams prioritized and supported by high level executives achieve 76% success rate, compared to just 19% with moderate executive support. Having a dynamic executive team is a boon for the entire organization as this effectiveness radiates throughout the company. Reverse is true also — a dysfunctional top leadership team reduces synergy and creates a drag on productivity. Even a slight miscalculation made by an executive team reverberates exponentially down the ranks, throttling productivity, and damaging morale.
A top performing cross-functional team should possess these four traits.
1. Direction — Clarity & Discipline
2. Effective Leadership Affirmation
3. Collaboration
4. Transparency & Honesty
Cross-functional teams should establish a strong sense of direction from the outset, grounded in open communication and active listening. They should understand how individual and team goals relate to the overall business strategy and adopt from the start a culture of ownership and commitment. Many such teams suffer from a lack of discipline, particularly in managed meetings. This happens because team members do not grasp their importance to business performance and fail to give them their due focus. Members of the team should have a clear understanding of their own and one another’s roles — in most cases they do not[7].
Talent wins games but teamwork wins championships[8].
Nick Tasler[9], an organizational psychologist believes that this confusion and indecision will surely poison the team structure. In his opinion there should be a crystal-clear understanding of primary strategic objectives about the project from the start. In addition, a clear and unchallenged identification of a leader who makes the call if the project gets mired in collaboration fatigue. If these two aspects are pre-determined and agreed upon then a competitive collaboration will work to its full beneficial extent.
For any idea to take root and work it must be supported vigorously by top management — high level affirmation is a must. A leader will have to convince the team to let go of the anxiety and apprehension that comes naturally in a cross-functional environment. In such an arrangement the leader is akin to a coach of a baseball team. His or her focus should always remain on the team and not the individual players. There will always be MVPs yet the challenging part for the coach would be to recognize the top contributors and at the same time make the other members feel that they too belong and have a stake in the success of the effort.
Companies at large put more emphasis on creating individual leaders instead of molding team or cross-functional leaders — a costly mistake. These ‘solo’ leaders of diverse cross-functional teams tend not to publicize issues within the team, fearful that acknowledging their struggles could shake the confidence of their many stakeholders. Organizations need to develop and train effective leadership teams that function as a collective unit rather than a loose affiliation of individual leaders. Professor Behnam Tabrizi teaches ‘Leading Organizational Transformation’ at Stanford University’s department of Management Science, he offers a solution in the form of a ‘Portfolio Governance Team’ or PGT where high-level leaders make complex decisions on the various projects in their portfolio together (distributed leadership). As they learn to work together as a cross-functional team, that attitude trickles down to the teams under their purview. Cisco experimented with such a cross-functional team, and it has translated to immense business growth for the company year over year[10].
Collaboration forms the heart of any successful cross-functional team. It encompasses direction, drive, discipline, and dynamism. Teams that excel are truly collaborative — they give and take feedback, solve problems, listen without preconditions, and hold themselves accountable. Creativity, cooperation, innovation, and improved division of work are among the various benefits of such collaboration. There are many stakeholders in a collaborative assignment which equates to lesser pressure on individuals in a team. A cross-functional project in a team environment harnesses the unique strengths of each member — whether its expertise, innovation, or creativity.
75% of cross-functional teams are dysfunctional.
Of the many paths to dysfunction, two prominent ones stand out: transparency and mediocrity — when cross-functional leadership is not transparent about difficulties faced or resolving the problem by constant restructuring of the team, removing outspoken talent, and grinding along in evident mediocrity. Both paths if not checked in a timely manner will lead to dysfunction. The leaders of such a team must be honest in acknowledging the hard and sustained effort it takes to become a successful team. Regular team surveys to get members’ opinions on their experience of the team, its culture, operations, and routines will improve a team-effectiveness rating. This process will reveal truths that can help a team get better[11].
Glenn Parker who is the author of Cross-Functional Teams[12] is right when he says that ‘trust creates the pathway to open communication.’ He goes on to add that members of cross-functional teams are there because they have something to contribute. They must be allowed and even encouraged to share their ideas, information, and opinions without restrictions. Open communication (honesty) is an absolute requirement for successful cross-functional teamwork. The concept of the team is that the outcome — the final product, the system, the service will be better because it has been created by the combined expertise from people representing a variety of functions. It is this viewing of the problem or issue from numerous vantage points that is the strength of the cross-functional team.
Challenges and Role of Leadership in Cross-Functional Teams
The idea of a cross-functional team is simple — gather a group of people from various parts of the organization who have something to contribute about a project, and great things will happen. It seems very logical to identify a project and then asking a bunch of people with a variety of backgrounds, expertise, experiences, and opinions to share their ideas and develop a plan of action. But when this process is field tested, barriers to its success emerge. Just assembling a good team and stacking it with talent is not enough. A clear statement of work along with a well-defined roadmap with measurable milestones is paramount to its success. Even when companies prioritize cross-functional collaboration still face the reality that working across functions remains messy, political, and frustrating. A recent survey done by Gartner shows that ‘78% of organizational leaders report experiencing collaboration drag — too many meetings, too much peer feedback, unclear decision-making authority, and too much time spent getting buy-in from stakeholders[13].’ Collaboration if not done correctly can wear out employees. Focused individual work by managers has suffered according to a recent study done by Connected Commons. Time spent in meetings, emails and collaborating with other employees in the company has increased manifold.
Why do we take on too much work in a cross-functional setting? Do we crave the feeling of accomplishment that comes from being the point of reference or the fear of being left out? There is always a lingering anxiety when you do not participate in cross-functional work — feelings of being labelled as unhelpful, not a team player or being unknowledgeable are most common. Efficient collaborators know that saying yes to something always means saying no to something else. Cross-functional collaborative overload is deceptive, if feels good like we matter and are in the thick of things but the hidden toll it takes on mental health of a person is insidious.
At the start of any cross-functional collaboration, first step should always be to identify and minimize whatever resistance the project or initiative is likely to create. Collaboration does not need to achieve consensus but effective leadership and clarity about who is responsible for what is vital. According to author Herminia Ibarra[14], collaboration is not a style. Many people mistakenly see collaboration as a leadership style in which relationships take precedence over the task at hand. What is paramount is the clarity about where the buck stops, which is one of the most critical aspects of efficient teamwork. It is the responsibility of the leadership to create such an atmosphere motivating and advancing such behavior.
Seeing an issue or a problem from someone else’s perspective is always illuminating. Studies[15] have shown that while most people are capable of taking other’s perspectives, they are not always motivated to do so. When managers who are used to work in silos asked to collaborate in a cross-functional setting, they often retreat into their respective cocoons guarding territory and minimizing threats to their authority. At the same time, at team level there is a prevalent fear that collaboration can lead to future attrition. Lisa Kwan who is an Executive Leadership Coach at Harvard Business School is right when she says that skilled workers have good reason to fear that their skills are becoming obsolete and that changes to status quo mean that they and their departments have become less valuable to the company. So, it is natural for groups to feel that requests for collaboration threaten their security — even when it is not their intent. Leaders can show the way forward by emphasizing to cross-functional teams how much the integration of diverse expertise enhances new value creation. Such practices if followed diligently over time dissolves the barriers that make boundary crossing work so difficult.
Whether a cross-functional team is successful or a failure at collaborating is a direct reflection of the philosophy of leadership in an organization. Lyda Gratton who is a professor at London Business School is of the opinion that teams do well when executives invest in supporting social relationships and demonstrate collaborative behaviors themselves. Such collaborative nature shown by senior team trickles down throughout the company. Employees discover that informal networks are the most effective way to accomplish tasks[16].
There is a common misconception about conflict as a hinderance to collaborative teamwork — not all conflict is bad. Conflict if managed properly and channeled in the right direction can generate innovative ideas and creative solutions. Disagreements focused on the work itself can benefit a team. Conflicts can generate diversity of ideas, expertise and out of box thinking for most issues faced by a cross-functional team. An effective leader encourages free flow of ideas, expression of opinion, looks at both sides of issues and uses the consensus method to make key team decisions[17].
Patience is the linchpin that holds everything together in a cross-functional team and it is needed in abundance. True collaboration is difficult. Ron Ashkenas who is the author of award-winning book ‘The Boundaryless Organization’ is on point when he declares, ‘Collaboration requires subordinating individual goals to collective achievement; it means engaging in tough emotional give-and-take discussions with colleagues about the strategies and ideas; and it often leads to working in new ways that may not be comfortable or easy’.
There will always be days when everything you do will feel futile, but if you persist, there will be progress. Like Henry Ford said,
‘Coming together is a beginning, staying together is progress, and working together is success.’
[1] Cross-Functional Teams — Working with Allies, Enemies, and Other Strangers by Glenn M. Parker
[2] J. S. Knox — Founder of Church of Scotland.
[3] Bruce Lipton — American author
[4] Alex ‘Sandy’ Pentland, HBR November 2013
[5] Behnam Tabrizi in Harvard Business Review, June 2015
[6] Research done by author Behnam Tabrizi in ‘Going on Offense: A Leader’s Playbook for Perpetual Innovation.’
[7] HBR October 2024
[8] Michael Jordan
[9] Harvard Business Review July 2014
[10] HBR June 2015
[11] Harvard Business Review October 2024
[12] Cross-Functional Teams — Working with Allies, Enemies, and other Strangers by Glenn M. Parker
[13] Harvard Business Review June 2024
[14] Act Like a Leader, Think Like a Leader by Herminia Ibarra
[15] Harvard Business Review June 2019
[16] Harvard Business Review November 2007
[17] Cross-functional Teams by Glenn Parker
