From silo mentality to collaboration in the support functions

The support functions are staffed by highly specialised employees, each representing their own area of expertise within a company. And although they are different, their interconnection is indisputable. Unfortunately, there are numerous examples where this collaboration is not sufficiently prioritised, causing the company to miss out on significant potential. As specialists of support functions, we speak from experience. We share some of these experiences in this article, providing insights into how collaboration between support functions can be facilitated.

Support functions are the backbone of any company. Like individual, essential bones that together form the pillar keeping the entire organisation upright. And just like in the human skeleton, the bones depend on each other. Without coherence, collaboration and synergy, the pillar is not functional. The same applies to a company.  

When we mention Finance, People/HR, Legal and IT, the organisational separation seems natural. These are differentiated and specialised areas of expertise that handle vastly different tasks.  

But what is the cost if cohesion and transparency across these areas of expertise are lacking?   

In the worst case: distrust, inefficiency, misunderstandings, lack of knowledge sharing, suboptimisation, confusion, frustration and poor decision-making. All consequences that negatively impact both the business and employee satisfaction. In many companies, there is a lack of awareness of the significant value in strong collaboration.  

Therefore, it is essential always to keep cohesion in mind – both when facing a change project and during regular daily operations. We speak from experience here. Through our work in making support functions successful, we know the value hidden within. These are the experiences we share with you here, providing insights into how to avoid the negative side effects of a dysfunctional backbone. 

When the legal department is asked to review a draft contract with a new client on behalf of the sales department, specific customer requests can easily slip through, especially if there are no legal complications hindering them. However, this can lead to practical challenges for other departments such as finance, IT and supply chain. To avoid or mitigate potential issues, having a process for contract management is a valuable tool, as a clear process ensures timely involvement and input from all relevant departments. 

When a company needs to change their ERP system or implement other comprehensive systems, it is crucial that the project group represents all relevant departments. For example, if the CFO is leading the project, it is important that the group does not make decisions solely based on the finance department's needs. If the project group primarily focuses on one department's needs, the company risks selecting a system that does not meet the overall business requirements, which can, in the worst case, lead to failed implementations and wasted resources.  

In contrast, a holistic approach can prevent important needs and objections from being overlooked and contribute to selecting a system that effectively supports the entire company. Successful system implementations undeniably require a process and organisation that ensures broad involvement and input from all support functions. 

There are numerous examples of reward and bonus systems that are solely based on the achievement of individual financial results and rankings ‒ especially in companies where the system is developed and managed by the finance department. Such systems often have a range of negative side effects (e.g., undesirable behaviour and complexity); issues that could have been avoided with an interdisciplinary approach.

We therefore recommend that you anchor your reward system in top management, as this helps to create a shared vision and a consistent language for ambitions and performance.  

Bonus and reward systems hold the greatest value when they are also based on an understanding of what drives motivation, so they reward the desired behaviour.

Development and implementation of an Operating Model can support standardisation, high quality, efficiency and scalability.   

In a number of companies characterised by good interdisciplinary collaboration, pronounced trust and a shared desire for success, we have observed that the finance function's positive experiences with using an Operating Model have been successfully spread to other support functions that had not previously considered this approach. 

But how can you avoid the aforementioned problems and their potential negative side effects? Returning to the metaphor of the backbone, imagine one of the vertebrae learns to function in a less strenuous way. This information and learning can advantageously be passed on to the remaining segments of the spine, so they work uniformly and cohesively. Here are a few examples of how you can support this in your company: 

In most companies, the support functions are organised as independent and separate departments, which are wholly or partially represented in the top management. In some companies, all disciplines are represented, while in others they are consolidated under a single representative, often the CFO.   

And unless top management proactively addresses and creates the framework for good interdisciplinary collaboration between support functions, there is a risk of ending up in an 'us-and-them' situation. This may seem like an insignificant and unavoidable consequence of having professionals with different skills, perspectives and interests. However, if management dismisses it as 'petty squabbles' between departments, the company risks not only the aforementioned disadvantages, but also missing out on significant synergy potential.  

Mutual respect and trust are, of course, essential prerequisites for good cross-functional collaboration. It is up to top management to create the framework and conditions for this culture to thrive. Beyond emphasising the importance of collaboration, it must also be reflected in concrete initiatives and working methods, as well as in how the support functions are organised and report to top management. 

Even though the individual support functions perform very different tasks, their purposes and roles are actually quite similar: fundamentally, it is about supporting the parts of the company that serve the customers as best as possible – and contributing to delivering on the long-term strategy. 

Support functions must be able to operate at all levels: strategic, tactical and operational, and they must balance efficient operations with regard to compliance, renewal and change. Business Partnering is a central discipline here, where support functions work closely with management and operational units to support the company's overall strategy and objectives.  

There are several significant similarities between the support functions, which means they can advantageously collaborate on roles and methods. 

Despite the professional differences, support functions can often collaborate on organisational matters, where they can benefit from learning from and inspiring each other  

When it comes to performing the various functional tasks, there are several similarities: many transactional tasks are often best handled in Shared Service Centres, which can accommodate multiple professional disciplines. Additionally, they all require subject matter experts and leaders, whom top management can advantageously position close to each other and themselves to promote collaboration and coordination. 

When it comes to organisation in relation to top management, it is also important to consider how the company achieves an equitable and productive collaboration between the support functions, so it benefits the entire company as much as possible in the long term.