THE DIMENSION
How an executive connects work across functions, exposes interdependencies, and clarifies the ownership of decisions that affect more than one part of an organization.
The dimension in context
How an executive connects work across functions, exposes interdependencies, and clarifies the ownership of decisions that affect more than one part of an organization.
More endorsement may indicate deliberate coordination across boundaries and attention to handoffs. Look for examples where that coordination changed a shared decision or prevented a contradictory commitment.
Less endorsement may occur in a relatively independent role or where integration responsibilities sit elsewhere. Consider the actual dependency structure before interpreting the response.
An illustrative work situation
Marketing promises a full launch, operations prepares a limited rollout, and finance assumes immediate revenue. Each functional plan has an internal rationale, but the enterprise commitment is inconsistent. A senior coordination discussion must resolve the shared assumptions rather than merely ask each function to execute better.
Enterprise coordination involves the boundaries between responsibilities. It does not require every decision to become centralized. A useful reflection asks who owned the shared commitment, what information crossed the handoff, and how conflicting assumptions were resolved. More meetings are not automatically evidence of better integration.
A small practice to examine
Map one enterprise commitment across functions. Record the dependency, information required, and decision owner at each boundary. Identify the first incompatible assumption and resolve it with the people authorized to change the relevant plans. Review whether the resolution reached all affected teams while they could still adjust.
Coordination can become a meeting burden if every issue is escalated to the entire group. Preserve local authority and reserve joint discussion for genuine shared dependencies.
A question for closer study
Would accounts from different functions agree that the coordination episode resolved the same shared dependency?
Read the example alongside the research
The following editorial passages come from the linked framework chapters. They provide context for the original teaching example above; the example is fictional and is not a reported study finding.
Imagine a product launch in which marketing promises a date, engineering plans a limited release, support expects a full customer rollout, and finance has assumed immediate revenue. Each plan may look coherent inside its own function. The enterprise problem is the mismatch between them. A coordination conversation should identify the shared commitment, the assumptions attached to it, and the person authorized to resolve the conflict.
Continue: Enterprise coordination across functional boundaries →
An empirical study could follow selected cross-functional commitments over time, recording unresolved dependencies before and after coordination episodes. Researchers would need to distinguish genuine resolution from shifting the problem to another team. Accounts from several affected functions could reveal whether one participant’s impression of clarity is shared. The study should treat disagreement as information about the system and the measurement, rather than assuming the most senior participant supplies the definitive account.
Continue: Enterprise coordination across functional boundaries →
SOURCES AND FURTHER READING
Hambrick (2007), Academy of Management Review ↗