Another factor that comes into play is the experience level of team members. Less experienced or new teams will have more difficulty working in a 'flat' team. The more experience in the field and the longer the team members have worked together the better the 'flat' model works. There is also a large dependency on the team leadership. If team leadership understands how to motivate and guide as a member, the flat model works great.

As an IS Manager, I have a couple of thoughts on the chain of command. The first is that the person at the top of the chain should not be on a power trip. If you have to constantly remind the people working for you that they work for you, then either they shouldn't be working for you, or more likely, you shouldn't be in your position.

Having said that, I think the chain of command is essential for at least two reasons.

1. It doesn't put my people in the uncomfortable position of setting their own priorities, or being asked to drop everything to jump on someone's pet project of the week. They can merely tell the person making the request that all priority changes must come through me.

2. If there is a problem in the department or with a project, it is clear who has to answer for it... the one in charge...Me. If someone in another department needs a butt to chew, it is mine. If someone in my department needs their butt chewed, I should be the only one doing the chewing.

When the chain of command is used to accomplish the goal of letting the people in the department concentrate on their work as opposed to office politics or power struggles, it is an essential tool.

Of course, not all companies will allow it to be used this way. I may just be lucky.

I beleive Bob states the key point that there always comes a time when someone has to make a decision. There are many types of decisions that need to be made - who to hire/fire, what projects to do, what are the standard operating procedures, how much money should be spent on IT, etc. In a traditional hierarchy, all decisions are made by the person in charge. That does not need to be the case. Flatter hierarchies and other organizational structures work when decisionmaking gets decentralized and when decisionmaking processes and criteria are better understand and defined. Since that takes considerable strategic thinking, it tends to be less common than simply appointing someone to be in charge.

Ah yes, chain of command.
I loved this comment..

2. If there is a problem in the department or with a project, it is clear who has to answer for it... the one in charge...Me. If someone in another department needs a butt to chew, it is mine. If someone in my department needs their butt chewed, I should be the only one doing the chewing.

Where I work I'm at the bottom of the food chain. What usually happens is that:
a. I get chewed out by the user directly
b. they complain to my boss
c. I get chewed out again
d. I never get a chance in either instance to explain anything and am guilty till proven innocent.

Nice, but that's how many real world places work.

An additional benefit of a chain of command is that it provides a possible growth path for your staff. In a flat hierarchy the only way up is out. Its also good to be training your replacement so that if you move up (or out) there will be someone who can fill your shoes and keep the team working with minimal disruption.

Simon,

Either your boss isn't taking responsibility for the department or he isn't respected by his peers. He should make it clear to the managers of the users who are chewing you out that their behavior was out of line and he doesn't expect it to happen again. He should get all of the facts, then decide on the course of action, which may be to simply fix the problem and move on, fix the problem and fix the process that led to the problem, point out to the user that the problem existed in the chair to keyboard interface, or (rarely and in private) chew you out if you did in fact deserve it.

I do want to clarify that I am not advocating a closed system where no one can talk to my people except for me. If the user has a problem with a system, then they should deal directly with the programmer most familiar with that system if at all possible. But the communication has to be kept professional and productive. Also, if the communication leads to the conclusion from my programmer that taking time now to immediatly fix the issue will significantly impact other projects, then my programmer will need to get approval from me to change his priorities unless this is a true 911 and I am not available, in which case I trust my employees judgement. Assuming an immediate fix is not possible or warranted, it is up to me to schedule the fix, and then report that back to the user requesting it and his manager.

A little common sense needs to prevail at all time. Anything taken to extreme is rarely a good thing. This applies to an extremely strict militaristic chain of command (unless you are in fact, in the military) or a completely flat structure where "everyone is on a completely equal footing".

I would also like to state that this applies to functional departments and projects only. It is possible to have highly productive teams where everyone truly is equal. These teams are good at brainstorming, and initiating new ideas that lead to some really good projects. But once the project has been set in motion, and probably broken down into sub-projects by department, then the chain of command takes over. And ultimatly each department head is responsible for his area of the project.

When I was treated with respect, I treated others with respect. But when they decided to shit and piss on me, I point blankly told them where they could stick it, and themselves. I was then immeaditaley told that I was fired. And my response was, "Thank you. I consider this a promotion. Now give me my final check." They just could not understand me. You see, I was always able to get employment, and when I couldn't, I created my own jobs. No one can make me cower for a check, and play little tin god with me. And now I own my own business. So I do not have to be concerned anymore about wages.