In a previous post, I talked about managing the interfaces. The Interfaces are the spaces between projects, departments, companies and people that need managing, not the projects, departments, companies and people themselves. In the previous post I discussed how most problems happen in the interfaces, the communication between functions. The question is: how do you lead in the interfaces?

Jeff Bezos at Amazon famously told all his groups they could only talk to each other via programming interfaces—APIs. An API, or Application Programming Interface, is a set of rules and protocols for building and interacting with software applications. APIs define the methods and data formats that a program can use to communicate with other software, which could be an operating system, library, or service. This meant that for a group to communicate with another, they were required to explicitly state what information they held and how it could be accessed. This also allows everyone else to know what information was shareable and with whom. In short, it was the interface.

Jeff Bezos was managing the interfaces by mandating very specific interfaces indeed! While this approach may be unconventional, it has contributed to Amazon’s success, becoming one of the most valuable companies in the world.

I would not suggest every company mimic Bezos but paying careful attention to the question of how your projects, departments, companies and people communicate with each other is an excellent place to start. Guiding them toward preferred methods is also highly advisable. You might also consider standardizing communication methods.

To effectively manage the gaps between systems or processes—the interfaces—it’s essential to first understand what these interfaces are and how they’re currently being managed. Managing an interface is much like managing a department: you need to engage with the people involved, understand their functions, and review the processes and systems in use. However, even with a good understanding of these interfaces, the complex nature of modern hierarchical and hybrid organizational structures can complicate fixing the problem. Let’s say you find a communication issue between two departments. Whose job is it to fix it? Most likely, each department will think the other should handle it.

What I’ve found to be effective is letting my people know that wherever the issue lies, I expect them to own it and try to fix it. This approach doesn’t prevent finger-pointing from the other side, which is a continual challenge. Be prepared that some people will use your willingness to tackle these issues as an “admission of guilt.” This can be problematic when discussed in closed circles. However, it is easily dismissed when addressed directly. Simply point out that you see all problems as the company’s problems to be solved, thinking globally, not locally. You choose to spend your energy fixing problems instead of assigning blame.  This resonates with most CEOs and executives. If this approach does not align with your company’s culture, you may want to reflect on whether it’s the right environment for you, potentially considering other opportunities where problem-solving is prioritized over blame.

By promoting ownership and a global problem-solving approach, leaders can foster a culture where challenges are met with collaborative solutions rather than blame. Nurturing such an environment significantly benefits the company where every team member is empowered to address and resolve issues collectively.