Tensions between Headquarters and Field Offices

Recently I’ve facilitated several working groups in different organizations that shared a theme: how to manage the tension between the headquarters or central office of an organization and field or local offices. In these cases, the field offices had considerable autonomy, but the central office, due to new legislation or other pressures, required more standardization and uniformity. Headquarters leaders knew, though, that if they simply imposed new standards or uniformity on the field offices, they would only face pushback–if not an outright rebellion.

While there is no easy solution to this problem, I was able to convene headquarters and field office leaders together to build consensus on the kinds of increased standardization needed. One important key is for headquarters personnel to distinguish between what is truly nonnegotiable and where they could leave room for the group to come up with the best approaches. Another key is transparency: to share the information with the field offices that allows them to understand the problems and the need for change. Transparency also helps (re)build trust. Finally, central office personnel must respect field staff’s views on how to address the issues. Field offices all face different local cultures, circumstances, and regulatory environments. A collaborative process can help honor these while addressing the problems that are more visible from headquarters.