Dreaming of Silos
A silo by any other name
In Creative Bureaucracy and its Radical Common Sense, Charles and Margie wrote:
“regardless of the country or city, the administrative logic and character of government
systems or organizational purpose is shared: silos; a lack of integrated and holistic thinking;
[and] an inability to cross boundaries...”.
This critique resonates both inside and outside of the bureaucracy. Many (most?) challenges are inherently complex and systemic, so there’s an undeniable need to work collaboratively across different expertise and policy domains. But we’re boxed in.
The world, of course, isn’t particularly interested in our neat org charts and functional segregation. Achieving positive outcomes typically requires a shedload of engagement, relationship building, and constructing a shared understanding across agencies, governments, and multiple sectors.
From my perspective, the friction partially stems from the disconnect between how our roles and functions are codified and the actual practice of delivery. As my (pretty?) diagram below attempts to illustrate, my work is transdisciplinary by nature. The challenge lies in crossing multiple silos rather than operating neatly within a single one.
Wouldn’t life be simple if I can do everything in Silo A!
Hypothetically, we could map out all these inter-relationships and nuances, aggregating them into some terrifying (but COMPLETE) mega-silo structure. But there are a few problems:
We’d have to understand all inter-relationships
There would still need to be some form of accountable decision-making and authorising chain (because that’s how parliamentary democracy rolls)
The structure would need to be legible, breaking it down into human-sized roles (not to mention the creative challenge of reviewing all role descriptions).
This quest slides into the trap described by Jorge Luis Borges in On Exactitude in Science, creating a map of the world so detailed that it essentially just the world.
So, we want silos?
Political philosophy aside, my current thinking is to accept that silos dividing functions exist—and we still need to get on with things. Maybe we want them, maybe we don’t - we certainly seem to have them though! So what do we do with/in them?
Here are three reflections I hope you’ll take away from this:
There will always be a gap between how our functions or roles are captured. For individuals, boundary clarity may be even more necessary as we become more consciously transdisciplinary (because we are finite!).
We are each the situated universal expert on the nuances of our own job and domain—it’s up to everyone to understand and contextualise their own work within the system (spiral).
As a creative bureaucrat, appreciate that our craft is in weaving together how the world actually is with our simplified models for responding to it. There’s a lot that can be achieved between the silos without needing to create new ones.
Ultimately, no matter where you are in the public service, you are best placed to recognise both the limitations of your silo and how your work (by practical necessity) transcends the illusion of rigidity. The task is to be attentive to and nurture the interconnections.
Further reflecting
Actor mapping can be a useful (and for me, entertaining) way to visualise the actual dynamism of your work or role - this is a decent overview.
Geoff Marlow’s writing about 2D/3D thinking has challenged me to reflect on the shape(s) of my role, and how that influences my approach to policy.
