If everyone’s in charge, no one’s in charge.
I don’t know if you’ve noticed the same thing, but at about the time that cooks became chefs, the role of a business’s chief executive officer blossomed into a “C-Suite” replete with a chief this and chief that.
According to a story I saw online, some former chiefs, to be precise, chief digital officers, bemoan the fact that hardly anyone wants to have a chief digital officer anymore. To be truthful, I didn’t even know that there was such a thing as a chief digital officer.
Apparently, the people who think they’re in charge of the digital world distinguish the digital world from the information world and abhor being lower on an org chart than the chief information officer, another role that hardly warrants being called a chief anything.
Ask yourself this: How many people should actually report directly to your organization’s chief executive officer? At what point does the chief executive officer become so bogged down with direct reports that his or her role becomes impossible?
Business life within a large medical group boils down to structure. Leadership roles within an organization should be supported, not burdened. This is doubly true if your group’s chief executive is also a practicing physician.
I’ve noticed that an org chart with a cacophony of chief this’s and that’s looks sort of like a capsized cargo ship: a large upside down hull with a few smokestacks beneath it. If everyone’s in the C-suite, well, no one really is.
The structure of your medical group’s business should follow its strategy. Unless your strategy is bloated management, I suggest that you carefully structure leadership roles and restrict the number of your CEO’s direct reports.
Otherwise, just like on one of those Food Network shows, there will be far too many “chefs” (i.e., chiefs) in the kitchen. ‘’Yes chef!”, “yes chef!”, and “yes chef!” doesn’t even make good TV.
