What happens when collaboration is undermined
When managers respond defensively to cross-silo collaboration, the effects may start small (for example, a hesitation to support a new idea or a subtle signal of disapproval), but they rarely stay contained. Over time, these behaviors can discourage initiative, weaken trust across teams, and reduce the likelihood that employees will take the interpersonal risks that cross-silo collaboration requires. What begins as a moment of interpersonal defensiveness can contribute to broader patterns of hesitation, fragmentation, and missed opportunities.
A chilling effect on innovation
Subtle signals from managers can shape what employees are willing to share. When cross-functional efforts are met with skepticism or resistance, even informally, employees take notice. Prior research shows that employees who experience undermining behavior are less likely to trust their leaders or feel safe speaking up. This lack of psychological safety can discourage the behaviors organizations depend on: sharing ideas, testing new approaches, and proposing cross-team solutions.
Initiative slows down
Over time, employees adjust their behavior to fit what the environment seems to reward or punish. When those seeking new perspectives are met with disapproval or subtle resistance, others quickly learn that staying in their lane is safer. Initiative gives way to caution, and learning opportunities are lost. Employees may become more hesitant, less curious, and increasingly disengaged. This gradual withdrawal can reduce energy, job satisfaction, and commitment to the organization.
Adaptability starts to suffer
Teams retreat into their silos when boundary spanning becomes risky. Knowledge remains compartmentalized, and challenges requiring cross-functional solutions are addressed in isolation. As collaboration narrows, the organization becomes less responsive to change, slower to spot emerging trends, less coordinated in decision-making, and more reliant on rigid structures. What suffers is not just speed, but adaptability: the quality organizations need to navigate uncertainty and compete in complex environments.
Hidden costs accumulate
The consequences of managerial defensiveness are rarely captured in formal metrics. Undermining behaviors tend to be subtle: a manager might delay a project involving external collaboration, an employee might be left out of a conversation, or a subtle comment in a team meeting casts doubt on an employee’s motives. The impact of these small acts gradually accumulates and takes a toll. Employees on the receiving end may report greater emotional strain and lower confidence. Talented employees who value autonomy and intellectual freedom may eventually disengage or leave. As more employees disengage or exit, institutional memory fragments, and cross-team coordination suffers. The organization loses the connective tissue that enables collaboration to thrive.
The solution: how to prevent managerial resistance
Our research points to a simple yet powerful insight: inclusion can disarm defensiveness. When employees seek their manager’s advice before or during boundary-spanning activities, it signals respect and alignment. This small gesture reassures managers that they remain part of the process and are not being bypassed or sidelined. It addresses the root of the threat response by preserving the managers’ sense of control and relevance.
What employees can do:
- Involve supervisors early. Don’t wait to be asked: initiate brief, respectful conversations about planned collaborations.
- Clarify intent. Make it clear that the goal is to strengthen the team’s work, not to circumvent authority.
- Acknowledge the supervisor’s role. Ask for their input, credit their support, and reinforce their value in the process.
What managers can do:
- Recognize the impulse to defend territory. Self-awareness is the first step toward supporting, rather than resisting, collaboration.
- Foster openness. Encourage transparency around external relationships, even if they fall outside the formal chain of command.
- Reward initiative. Create a climate where employees feel safe to connect, explore, and bring outside insights into the team.
Three organizational strategies to support this shift
1. Clarify the role of managers in collaboration. Provide clear frameworks for when and how boundary spanning should occur, and explicitly position managers as enablers, not gatekeepers. When expectations are clear, managers are less likely to interpret employee initiative as a threat.
2. Increase visibility without micromanagement. Use shared dashboards, team check-ins, or collaboration tools that keep supervisors in the loop without requiring constant oversight. When managers feel informed, they are less likely to feel excluded or blindsided.
3. Redefine leadership success. Shift the criteria for strong leadership to include enabling innovation, facilitating cross-team work, and creating psychological safety. When these qualities are rewarded, the organization signals that power-sharing is a skill, not a weakness.
Building a culture that supports cross-silo collaboration demands deliberate design. The following practices can help ensure that boundary-spanning behaviors are recognized, supported, and sustained:
- Invest in leadership development. Focus on relational leadership, emotional intelligence, and adaptive power-sharing.
- Reward collaborative behaviors. In performance evaluations, recognize the underlying actions that enable innovation, and not just the outcomes: boundary spanning, knowledge sharing, and mentorship.
- Create forums for open dialogue. Establish cross-functional communities of practice or shared digital platforms where collaboration is visible and valued.
- Foster psychological safety. Support employees in taking interpersonal risks, including reaching across team lines, by reinforcing that initiative is valued, not penalized.
Cross-silo collaboration offers clear benefits for organizations, from unlocking innovation to building adaptability. Yet these outcomes depend on employee initiative and managerial support. To realize the full potential of collaboration, organizations must address the psychological dynamics that shape how it is perceived, especially concerns about control and recognition. When managers feel respected and included, cross-team work shifts from being a perceived threat to a shared opportunity. It’s not enough to tell teams to collaborate; leaders must be prepared to support it, not just in principle, but in practice.
- The research paper Protecting Their Turf: When and Why Supervisors Undermine Employee Boundary Spanning was co-authored by Julija N Mell of the Rotterdam School of Management, Giles Hirst of the Research School of Management, Australia National University, and Andrew Carnegie of Carnegie Consulting Group, Melbourne.