Someone should create and produce a TV series about traffic engineers. Really. It would involve lots of money, fast cars, untimely deaths and, if screened carefully, a group of good-looking people saying intelligent things that no one understands.

Perhaps, you think I’m joking. I’m not. Effective transportation departments probably save more lives than your average emergency room.

Our city has recently communicated their intention to redesign a road that I travel regularly. They’ve discovered that there is a higher than acceptable number of accidents on it. This particular road has been a major artery for our community for 60-70 years.

This road hasn’t always had so many accidents. The original design, presumably, worked well. However, major developments in the area have changed traffic patterns and density and, an unintended consequence of this has been, people run into each other.

Sure, the city could focus on increasing individual driver skills and responsibility. Or, they could focus on policing. They could even create a provocative public-awareness campaign.

Instead, their chosen response will be unsexy, generally boring, and (after construction is done) mostly unnoticed. They’ll change a few signs, lights and lanes. And people will stop running into each other. They will alter the structure of travel.

Most professionals equate building structure in organizations as life-sucking administration or bureaucracy. It’s the organizational version of traffic engineering: generally boring and too difficult to bother with. Not important. Not sexy.

Instead, I’d encourage you to view it differently. My best clients actively design and utilize structure and systems; which allow them to quickly address issues and drive towards success. They actively monitor and improve their systems, ensuring that those systems are working well for the purposes intended.

Unfortunately, nearly 80% of requests I receive, asking me to intervene in an organizational conflict, begin with a request that I address a “personality problem” between a few people. And, in nearly every case, the real issues are resolved by addressing structure or systems. It’s just like changing the signs, the lights and the lanes in a road.

Let’s clarify what I mean by structure and systems:

Structure usually refers to how a workplace is organized (although it can refer to even the physical location, workspace or technologies people use.)

Systems, for our purposes, are what ties or coordinates those different units of structure to your people. Here is a list of common structures and systems that most organizations should have in place:

• Hiring processes including:
  • Selection
  • Expectation Setting
  • On-boarding
  • Clarity in Roles and Responsibilities
• Staff performance improvement processes
• Staff disciplinary processes
• Conflict resolution or grievance processes
• Decision making and authority delegation processes
• Organizational charts describing lines of authority and roles within an organization
• Management structures that match the size or composition of a team. This includes structures appropriate for single or multiple locations, on-site or remote staff, paid or volunteer workers, etc.
• Regular planning and accountability processes
• Well-utilized or managed meetings
• Appropriate and guided administration support
• Appropriate levels and engagement of management and supervision

In my experience, if a problem has continued for more than weeks or months, there is almost always something structural or systemic at its root.

Even if there are personality issues, you must ask (or I certainly will) “Why has this issue been allowed to continue for so long?”

In fact, many of these organizations have become so accustomed to personality problems, they literally just view it as the cost of doing business. But it’s far more likely that these issues are a result of what they’ve built and maintained over time.

Review the list above: Can you describe each of the processes listed at your organization? Where is your company’s organizational chart? Have you determined what a sufficient level of administration and management support should look like? Would each person on your team answer similarly?

Does your organization’s structure and systems best serve you, your team and those your organization was created to serve?