Line Management versus Network Leadership 2/2

In the first part, I discussed the connection between line management and network leadership within a contemporary organisation where the network organisation generates value. I gave an example how they work together for example when it is about hiring and firing people.

This post provides insight into what occurs when Line Management and Network Leadership fail to collaborate and some guidelines to provide this from happening.

A Practical Guide to Ensuring Failure

If you want to guarantee your organization’s downfall, just make sure there’s no alignment between line management and network leadership, or better yet, actively avoid it to keep those precious territories intact. This will surely lead to a delightful array of issues like sluggish delivery, dysfunctional teams, and a spectacular mishandling of talent.

Here’s a breakdown of the key risks related to failure and how they affect the system:

Sub-optimisation of Flow (Mik Kersten’s core concern)

When line management and network leadership are misaligned, value streams get blocked:

• Teams might be understaffed or have the wrong skillsets for their mission.

• Hiring decisions may be based on org chart logic rather than flow needs.

• People may be assigned where there's an 'authorised position' (formatieplaats) not where they enable value delivery.

• Result: The system optimizes for local priorities (headcount, power, hierarchy) rather than end-to-end flow, causing delivery delays and customer dissatisfaction.

  
  

Cognitive Load Mismatch (Team Topologies concern)

Teams might be burdened with individuals who:

• Don’t fit the intended interaction model (e.g., too siloed for a collaborative team).

• Don’t bring the necessary capabilities or adaptability.

• Increase friction within or between teams.

• Result: Teams become overwhelmed, slow down, or start failing quietly.

  
  

Shadow Politics and Empire Building

Without alignment, line managers may:

• Hoard talent to maintain control or justify headcount budgets.

• Block reassignments or terminations to avoid appearing “weak” or “losing influence.”

• Resist platform thinking or team topologies redesigns that reduce their span of control.

• Result: Collaboration becomes transactional. Strategic agility is lost. Turf wars slow down change initiatives.

  
  

Erosion of Trust and Psychological Safety

Team members sense the conflict or misalignment and:

• Stop being open about problems or blockers.

• Avoid giving feedback upward.

• Feel trapped in teams with poor fit, unsupported growth, or toxic dynamics.

• Result: People disengage, quiet-quit, or leave. Culture degrades.

  
  

Broken Accountability Loops

If team performance suffers, and it’s unclear whether it's a people issue (line manager) or a system issue (network leadership), no one takes responsibility—or worse, finger-pointing begins.

• Result: Slow, political decision-making. Weak remediation. Talent mismanaged.

  
  

Without alignment, you get misplaced talent, slow flow, toxic politics, and weakened teams. The organization may still function, but not thrive. Over time, the best people leave, delivery slows, and transformation efforts stall.

Guidelines to Prevent Misalignment

improving the relationship between line management and network organization leadership is both crucial and totally doable, but it requires intentional design, cultural shifts, and clear practices. Here's a practical set of suggestions that can help them work together more effectively:

Establish Clear Roles and Shared Goals

• Define a joint Operating Model that outlines:

  • Who is responsible for team composition

  • Who owns performance and development

  • Who escalates and resolves team dysfunction

• Create shared objectives that tie line managers and network leaders to team outcomes and value stream flow(e.g., OKRs) preferable in a 'Management Team'.

This avoids blurred responsibilities and helps both sides see that they are joint stewards of team health and delivery success.

Create a Talent Co-Management Model

• Treat people as co-owned assets between line and network leadership.

• Require joint hiring decisions, mutual sign-off on role changes, and collaborative performance assessments.

• Set up regular check-ins (e.g., quarterly talent reviews or calibration meetings).

Ensures talent is placed where it can deliver most value, and prevents hoarding or political protection.

Use Flow + Team Happiness metrics as a Shared Dashboard

• Track and review flow efficiency, lead time, and team happiness scores together.

• Identify where people or system issues are impacting flow.

• Use these data points to drive action, not blame (metrics mindset).

It shifts the focus from “who owns what” to “how well are we flowing and learning?”

Normalise Joint Conversations about People Issues

• Set expectations that performance issues, team fit, and skill gaps are not HR-only or tech-only concerns.

• Encourage joint coaching plans and re-skilling before escalating to offboarding.

• Conduct exit interviews together to learn system-level lessons.

It reduces the emotional and political weight of people decisions by making them systemic, not personal.

Lead by Example at the Leadership Level

• Create leadership pairs or triads where line and network leaders co-lead value streams or domains.

• Model healthy collaboration, feedback, and shared decision-making.

• When line managers and network leaders participate in a Management Team, they should invest to become a functional team.

Culture follows structure, but it also follows behavior. If leaders collaborate well, others will too.

Educate Both Roles on the Bigger System

• Run shared workshops on the new operating model and the theories behind it was build upon

• Teach line managers about cognitive load, interaction modes, and flow efficiency.

• Teach network leaders about talent development, coaching, and HR basics.

A shared language and understanding builds empathy and reduces friction.

Conclusions

 As previously noted, I personally encountered how the tension between line management and network leadership can quickly develop into an undesirable situation. This set of articles aims to help you recognize these tensions early and offers suggestions on preventing them from escalating.

We always welcome your experiences and feedback.