Rhineland versus Anglo-Saxon thinking and the Scale of Collaboration

Copyright image of the Inverted Key from Stimulansz

In many organisations, teams struggle with the question of how to increase ownership, creativity and agility. Two organisational models, one of which is currently dominant, offer a possibility: Rhineland thinking with its bottom-up, people-centric approach, and the more prevalent Anglo-Saxon thinking with firm hierarchy, clear layers and tight control. Both models have their own advantages and disadvantages - and the Scale of Collaboration helps to understand where teams end up in each model, and how leadership can make a difference in this. Ownership can mean trusting that low down in the organisation, the right choices are made that deviate from the principle of equal treatment for all, precisely to achieve better results (see illustration). The question is which organisational form will help your organisation get there?

Through task and team focus towards true cooperation

Rhineland organising starts with the team's capacity to carry, not just the task. By keeping professionals involved from the bottom up - "from the bottom up" - a sense of ownership and trust grows. The primary task remains central, and the "office" supports the team - not the other way around. In terms of the Scale of Collaboration: teams move faster into the world of collaboration where they are self-organising and flexible.

Advantages Rhineland:

- Equality: everyone has access and influence, creating commitment (cooperation).
- Fluid time: teams sometimes take time to slow down ('slow down') so that they can speed up later (speed up) and experience flow.
- Sustainability: long-term focus and care for people prevents depletion.

Points of interest:

- Self-organisation requires direction: a team that has to work "by itself" without preconditions can quickly get bogged down in eluding it. Setting boundaries and continuing to provide leadership are essential.
- The mindset shift takes time: moving from a top-down culture takes persistence, and not every individual or department is ready for it right away.

Warning:
If leadership is neither organised from the teams nor comes from within the organisation, stagnation lurks. Teams end up on the roundabout of shirking and do not get out of there easily.

A clear structure helps to achieve goals

The Anglo-Saxon model works in layers: Supervisory Board, board, management, department heads. This rake structure can be efficient in growth and funding, and with the right leaders in the right place can provide a lot of clarity and direction.

Advantages Anglo-Saxon:

- Scalability: quickly scale up and attract funding.
- Measurability and accountability: clear KPIs and management layers can drive short-term results (although often at the expense of long-term cohesion).
- Clarity: Who is responsible for what and who will do what and when?

Points of interest:

- Glass ceilings: decisions become disconnected from execution and take teams into the world of survival, where employees feel powerless.
- Pressure from above: more top-down control quickly leads to teams feeling under pressure and organising counter-pressure. As a result, the conversation about improvement falters and people get caught up in blaming each other.
- Loss of human touch: focus on profits, budgets and reporting can undermine mutual trust, and shift teams into the world of avoidance or survival, resulting in absenteeism and drop-outs.

Warning:
When leaders become too distant from the shop floor, collaboration happens "over the heads of implementers" and change stagnates.

Leadership: from 'controlling' to 'navigating'

On the Scale of Cooperation, a leader moves between the survive, elude and cooperate worlds. Within Rhineland organisation, the leader facilitates, deploys keys such as 'recognise-pick-up-appreciate' and builds trust so that teams choose the right course themselves. Within Anglo-Saxon structures, provided there is trust and sufficient investment in the relationship, the leader can take teams in tow and inspire and challenge people to unprecedented achievements.

Leaders who navigate are attentive to the following:

1. Talking with rather than about - they share vision as well as listen to concerns (trust rises).
2. Creating clarity - they make sure everyone knows what the task is, what the processes and responsibilities are, and what the common goal is.
3. Feedback and assurance - they help teams learn from experiments and successes so that (self-organising) teams stay in the collaborative world.

The Scale as a roadmap in transition

Whether your organisation is structured Rhineland or Anglo-Saxon, the Scale of Collaboration provides tools to navigate:

From survival to avoidance - acknowledge the tension, let teams dare to discuss what is going on under pressure.
From avoidance to collaboration - invest in trust, clarity and shared ownership.
Performing at peak performance under pressure - facilitating that teams recognise what needs to be done, pick up issues that are priorities and appreciate each other for the work done, especially in challenging times.

Rhineland thinking naturally helps teams move more towards working together, provided leaders continue to invest in humanity but also clarity for the long term. Anglo-Saxon thinking offers scalability and structure, but requires extra attention to prevent the team from moving too quickly into elopement or survival due to a lack of connection and/or too much pressure on the team.

What do you guys choose?

Do your ways of leadership and organisational design enable teams to truly work together or do they (unintentionally) push them into the avoidable pitfalls of avoidance and survival?
How can you integrate elements of Rhineland organising-such as equality and liquid time-without losing the benefits of scalability and measurability?

The paradox is that the key to sustainable growth lies in the balance between human scale and clear structure. The Scale of Collaboration shows the way: growing in trust, clarity and shared responsibility is what makes organisations in the Netherlands and beyond truly agile.