My first full-time job title was Rental Manager. It meant I was in charge of organizing rentals and getting equipment out the door.

Internally, it was a perfectly understandable, all-encompassing title. But outside our organization, my title had no authority because it had no meaning.

This became evident when we were preparing to sign our first national contract. I was the point person, because one of the responsibilities of the Rental Manager was to manage accounts.

When the client asked for my title, I said, “I’m the Rental Manager.”

The client said, “Wait. I need somebody to sign this who has authority.”

I had authority. I reported directly to the owner of the company, who gave me the authority — but my title didn’t communicate that to the client.

To resolve the problem, I became Director of Sales and Operations, a title which clearly stated what processes I was in charge of: the sales process and the operations process.

That title was unheard of in our industry, where sales and operations were seen as enemies. Any time people got together to talk business, the war between sales and operations was bound to come up — and there I was in charge of both groups.

But, as I always say, the job of sales is to sell what operations can support, and the job of operations is to support whatever sales can sell. The relationship between sales and operations is symbiotic. Without one, you don’t need the other.

So, the title of Director of Sales and Operations wasn’t just a title. It conveyed my authority to clients outside the organization, and it clarified to the employees inside the organization what I had authority over — all of which were reflected on the company’s organizational chart.

That’s not always the case.

Misapplying Titles

Titles can convey authority and expertise to your clients, partner vendors, and affiliates. But they can also cause confusion when misapplied.

For example, one of the most misapplied titles I see is “Director of Sales.” I rarely find a Director of Sales who actually directs sales. They’re not in charge of the sales process, and they’re not in charge of other salespeople. The “Director of Sales” is typically the salesperson who’s been around the longest or had the most accounts. It’s a title often given in lieu of a raise — and most people know that.

Employees need to know who to report to, who will evaluate their work, and who manages the processes they’ll be held accountable for. That’s what an org chart does for an organization: it provides transparency and clarity.

So, where do you chart the Director of Sales who is not, in fact, in charge of anything? Do you place her on a line with all the other salespeople? Do they all report to the President?

It gets pretty confusing, so people often manipulate the org chart to make that Director of Sales appear to have authority over other salespeople — none of whom actually report to her. (If you’ve ever tried to manage salespeople like this, you know it’s like herding kittens.)

Now you’ve got a chunk of your org chart that doesn’t reflect what it was intended to reflect. How much can you trust the rest of the org chart, then? One failed piece compromises the rest.

Org charts and titles should bring clarity. If all they’re doing is confusing people, creating conflict, or shuffling responsibility, they’re being put together the wrong way.

Reframing the Organizational Chart

Before you rehaul your org chart by putting people in places that seem to be commensurate with their experience or level of importance, figure out who the process owners are.

Ask yourself, “If I were to change the rental management software we use to track inventory, who would have to sign off on it other than the owner? Who will it affect? Who’s will train our employees?”

That person (or those people) is the process owner. A process owner isn’t necessarily in charge of people — in fact, a lot of process owners aren’t great people managers because they’re much better process organizers. An org chart that identifies this person is very helpful.

From there, define who the managers, supervisors, and workers are. You may have separate managers in charge of production personnel, warehouse personnel, logistics, etc. You may also have separate supervisors in charge of the weekday warehouse crew, the weekend warehouse crew, etc.

If any of these people want to change the processes and procedures in place, they’ll need to go through the process owner. To clarify, the process owner is not necessarily in charge of the managers, supervisors, or workers — just the processes everyone follows.

Before you attempt to leverage titles or organizational hierarchy, take a look at the processes and who should be managing them. You don’t want to lose the process owners in a title hierarchy shuffle — because they’re extremely important for an organization’s success.

Conclusion

Need to rethink your org chart? First, look at the processes. Define who will own the process, who will manage the process, and who will supervise the people carrying out the process.

Even though process owners may not supervise people, they’re key players in the org chart. Without them, the chart folds in on itself.

As I mentioned earlier, org charts are designed to bring clarity. So are titles. If all they’re doing is confusing people, creating conflict, or shuffling responsibility, they’re getting put together the wrong way.

If this happens to you, it’s time to rethink the matter.