Being “layered” in an organization means reporting to someone who now sits between you and the leader you used to report to.
While this is universally interpreted negatively by those who have been layered, this new reporting line has some distinct advantages as well as drawbacks. The key is to understand why you were layered, and how to react to it in the most professional way possible.
When leaders and team members are not up to the tasks of a role, lack the skills to be successful, or have underperformed over a long period of time, they are often demoted and asked to report to someone who can give them more attention and oversight than their current leader. This layering gives them the time to reestablish their worth and allows them the opportunity to operate with the safety net of a more hands-on leader.
Being demoted in this fashion is never a good thing or welcome news. Those who are layered because they are viewed as not being up to the job have a decision to make: Reinvest in themselves with a new leader, re-earn their stripes, and wait patiently for opportunities to prove their worth, or seek a role on another team and get a fresh start without the baggage of negative perceptions. This is never an easy choice to make.
But before making this call and deciding what to do next, it is essential to understand exactly why the layering has occurred. The presumption that every layering is a demotion is false. While a recasting of reporting lines due to performance is not unusual, it is not the most common reason for layering.
The number one reason leaders and team members are layered is because their leader has too many direct reports. When the number of reports is beyond 10, leaders are faced with a critical decision. How do they lead and manage an ever-growing set of team members who deserve their attention and investment on a weekly basis?
Good leaders recognize that allowing team members below them to operate on their own, without much guidance or oversight, is a disservice to them. They don’t grow or develop with the mentorship of an active leadership exchange.
The unpopular answer, of course, is to layer them by appointing a leader between the parties who has the time and attention to truly lead them to success. In the best cases, this actually turns out to be a hugely positive outcome, as the layered party now has the resources and guidance to get more done with the right amount of oversight.
While no one wants to be layered, in the case of a leader with too many direct reports, this outcome is inevitable and not unfavorable to the careers or development of those who now report to a more active and attentive leader.
Not all layering is done for performance issues. In fact, most layering of leaders and team members is done in self-defense by a leader with too many reports. Getting to the bottom of why you have been layered is essential. Having a frank conversation with the powers that be is in everyone’s best interest. Understand exactly what the reason for layering is.
After the initial distaste, you might find it turns out to be a good idea.
A Daily Dispatch from the Front Lines of Leadership.
