How to Build Silos: One Performance Review at a Time
“It is teamwork that remains the ultimate competitive advantage, both because it is so powerful and so rare.” — Patrick Lencioni
Throughout my career, one of the most critical aspects of leadership has been building high-performance teams. Conversely, one of the most agonizing realities in organizations is the persistent misalignment that causes teams to work hard yet unintentionally work against each other. Ironically, one of the mechanisms that most frequently reinforces this misalignment is the traditional performance review — a process intended to assess success but that often rewards behaviours undermining collaboration.
This article is not a critique of performance reviews. Rather, when reviews focus solely on individual achievement, they unintentionally create conditions where siloed thinking thrives. A recent conversation with a senior executive reminded me how often this issue goes unnoticed until results begin to slip. It also prompted me to reflect on my own experiences leading technical teams, managing projects, and facilitating alignment — and how the right structures can break down silos long before they form.
Cascading Goals, Colliding Priorities
“The strength of the team is each individual member. The strength of each member is the team.” — Phil Jackson
The traditional corporate model seems logical: executives set strategic goals, those goals cascade through the organization, and individuals are evaluated on their contribution to those goals. The intent is alignment — the result is often fragmentation.
As goals move downward, they become narrower and more specialised, eventually forming department-specific metrics that unintentionally compete with one another. For example, the Operations team may be measured on reducing short-term facility production costs, while the Reliability team is measured on lowering long-term lifecycle costs, and the Projects team is tasked with delivering facilities at the lowest possible capital cost. Individually, all teams succeed against their scorecards. Collectively, they pull the organisation in opposite directions.
This phenomenon isn’t caused by poor leadership or lack of effort; it is caused by a system that rewards isolated performance over shared success. As W. Edwards Deming observed, “A bad system will beat a good person every time.”
I experienced this firsthand while serving as Team Lead for Asset Management in a large corporation. Our portfolio spanned Equipment Integrity, Rotating Equipment, Electrical & Controls, Maintenance & Reliability, Specifications, and Asset Records. Each group was highly skilled, but their accountabilities overlapped, and operations often struggled to know whom to call for what. Twice a year, we held alignment workshops to clarify ownership, expectations, and interdependencies — not only what each group was responsible for, but how they were accountable for enabling others to perform. These sessions strengthened collaboration, improved service delivery, and created a unified “single voice” to the business units we supported.
Alignment does not emerge from cascading goals; it emerges from shared understanding, shared accountability, and shared purpose.
Strategic Projects Stalled by Silo Priorities
“Strategy without alignment is like a compass without a needle.” — Anonymous
Major initiatives — start-ups, capital projects, and especially facility turnarounds — provide some of the clearest illustrations of how misalignment can derail execution. These projects are inherently cross-functional and require high levels of coordination, preparation, and communication.
In my leadership roles across greenfield start-ups and brownfield turnarounds, I observed a simple truth:
The best projects I’ve ever led had strong alignment; the worst suffered from misalignment.
During planning phases, tools such as RACI charts helped clarify who was Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, and Informed. When each team understood its role — and how its deliverables enabled other teams — scope definition improved, job plans were developed earlier, and resource needs became clearer.
But when alignment was weak, predictable problems emerged:
late scope additions
unclear ownership
competing priorities
bottlenecks
reactive decision-making
cost, risk, and schedule overruns
The value of alignment is not in the documents produced; it is in the alignment created through the process itself. For large initiatives, this alignment must be reinforced through a leadership-level steering committee. For smaller organisations, it may be as simple as ensuring the right people are in the room early and often. In every case, alignment is not a luxury — it is a prerequisite for predictable outcomes.
The Value of Alignment
Alignment is one of the most powerful performance drivers an organisation can cultivate. Its benefits are tangible, repeatable, and visible across teams, projects, and functions.
Here are the outcomes I’ve consistently seen in aligned organisations:
It accelerates onboarding and role transitions. Clear roles, responsibilities, and interdependencies help new employees and leaders integrate quickly and effectively.
It strengthens collaboration and relationships. Teams communicate earlier, escalate issues sooner, and support each other naturally because expectations are transparent and mutually understood.
It delivers results. Aligned teams execute faster, make better decisions, and maintain resilience during high-stakes periods such as shutdowns, emergencies, or major change.
It improves quality. Clear accountability reduces errors, gaps, and rework, leading to higher-quality outcomes and safer performance.
It improves visibility and clarity. Alignment creates a shared understanding of what matters most, making progress easier to track and allowing leaders to anticipate issues before they escalate.
It prevents false assumptions about capacity. Organisations often believe they lack resources when the real issue is unclear ownership or duplication of effort. Alignment reveals where bottlenecks truly exist.
Alignment is not an event. It is a leadership discipline — a continuous practice that connects vision to execution, strategy to action, and people to one another.
The Takeaway
When performance reviews focus solely on individual output, they inadvertently reinforce silos. But when they measure alignment, collaboration, and shared success, they become one of the most powerful tools for building high-performance teams.
“Interdependent people combine their own efforts with the efforts of others to achieve their greatest success.” — Stephen Covey
Misalignment does not happen because people lack effort; it happens because organisations lack clarity. Leaders who embed alignment into their planning, communication, performance systems, and daily behaviours create cultures where teams naturally row in the same direction.
Alignment doesn’t happen by chance.
It happens by design.
And when it happens, organizations don’t just perform — they thrive.
Ron Bettin, MBA, PMP, CMC is a Canadian executive and public speaker with more than 25 years of leadership and entrepreneurial experience. He co-founded several companies and provides management consulting through Adduco Inc. to organizations of all sizes. Ron understands the importance of building value and enabling success. He is a graduate of the Southern Alberta Institute of Technology and holds an MBA from Queen’s School of Business.