Why Strict Organizational Hierarchies Can Be Dangerous

Hierarchies are ubiquitous in nature. They evolved for a reason. They make group work, resource allocation, and the achievement of group objectives efficient. If everyone knows their position in the pecking order, the team can focus on its goals without having to deal with coordination problems.

There are cultural variations across the globe in how position in hierarchies affects team dynamics. In Asian countries, it is generally believed that people in higher positions need to be respected and their decisions not questioned, while in the West, people are more open to challenging their seniors.

While respect for seniority can enable a team's smooth functioning, it can also mean the difference between death and survival.

Psychologist Adam Galinsky and colleagues analyzed data from over 5,100 Himalayan expeditions from 56 countries, comprising more than 30,000 climbers. Teams from hierarchy-respecting countries were able to get more of their climbers to the top compared to teams from countries that encourage more questioning, such as the Netherlands, Norway, Germany, or Italy.

There are no surprises there. We know that adhering to a set hierarchy enables effective coordination and teamwork. You listen to the boss, and you get to reach the top. This is no secret.

But more of the climbers from hierarchy-respecting nations perished on the way to the top. While they were successful in getting most climbers to the top, they also lost more of their climbers on the way to the top compared to hierarchy-challenging nations. Listening to the boss can be injurious to your health at times.

Galinsky also found that nationalities made no difference to climbing success on solo expeditions; they mattered only in team expeditions. If you are climbing alone, your chances of survival are the same as those of another climber from anywhere. Nationality does not matter.

What matters is whether there is a boss and whether you obey orders blindly.

The authors conclude that hierarchy is a double-edged sword. While it helps the team gel well, unless team members are empowered to express their opinions and challenge others when poor decisions are made, hierarchical organizations suffer from the effects of poor groupthink, which can result in lost lives.

On March 27, 1977, KLM Flight 4805 initiated take-off from Los Rodeos Airport on the Spanish island of Tenerife during dense fog, without getting ATC clearance and collided with a Pan Am flight stationed on its runway, killing 583 people, including its celebrated pilot Jacob Van Zanten.

Van Zanten, also the head of KLM’s safety program, overruled his co-pilot when he told him there was no clearance to fly from the ATC. Unfortunately for everyone, the copilot did not make any further attempt to stop him.

Finding that many such disasters resulted from leadership failures rather than a lack of technical skills, NASA created the CRM (Crew Resource Management) training program for pilots. It teaches the pilot to communicate effectively and accept feedback, and crew members are taught to speak up and challenge their superiors when they see they are about to make a mistake.

Galinsky and Swaab found that egalitarian teams perform the best. Analyzing the performance records of football teams, they found that institutional equality of the nations and psychological equality of the national teams correlated with success. Institutional equality was measured using the ‘Civil Liberties Index’ published by the Freedom House and the ‘Voice and Accountability Index’ of the World Bank. The authors concluded that egalitarianism makes organizations stronger.

Challenge your bosses' opinions when you feel something is not right. Leaders: Encourage and learn to listen to critical feedback, ask for help, and be vulnerable. It could have prevented many disasters, including some at NASA.