This article comes from a question I am frequently asked in executive coaching programmes by coachees who, in Mozambique, work in sectors and organisations marked by a high hierarchical culture.
In this article, I invite my readers to answer the following question: is Hierarchical Bypass (HB) a harmful practice or a window to solve problems quickly?
To complement this reflection, I suggest reading three other articles I’ve written in this column: ‘Yes Boss’¹ ; Is it (Im)possible to negotiate with a Bully?² ‘Middle Management, an Endangered Species?’³
1. What is the Hierarchical Bypass (HB)?
In my opinion, Hierarchical Bypass (HB) is a social practice in which:
- The formal chain of command is ignored,
- allowing direct interactions
- between different hierarchical levels,
- without the involvement of the planned intermediaries (e.g. middle managers),
- [These intermediaries play a crucial role in organisational coordination,
- strategically connecting the top management and the operational base.
- This practice can occur in both directions of the chain of command:
- Upwards: when an employee bypasses the immediate superior and communicates directly with top management.
- Downwards: when a manager or leader bypasses direct subordinates and communicates with lower hierarchical levels.
Hierarchical Bypass generates significant financial and behavioural costs for organisations
2. Key characteristics of HB
The key characteristics of BH are:
Ignoring the Established Hierarchy: BH occurs when formal communication routes are deliberately or inadvertently ignored, causing disruptions in internal order.
Breaking the Flow of Information: this practice often results in incomplete or distorted information, as intermediate levels have no opportunity to add context or validate data.
Impact on Middle Management Authority: by bypassing managers or intermediaries, BH weakens the authority and legitimacy of these leaders within the team, making strategic alignment difficult.
Accelerator in Crises: although it can be used to solve urgent problems, BH often creates harmful precedents, encouraging similar behaviour in situations other than an emergency.
Interpersonal tensions: this practice can create an environment of mistrust, with managers feeling devalued and employees confused about the correct channels of communication.
3. Sectors of activity in which BH is most prevalent
Hierarchical Bypass (HB) tends to be more prevalent in business sectors that have i) rigid hierarchical structures, ii) high process complexity, iii) and a strong dependence on centralised decisions. Some examples:
Financial sector: due to the high level of regulation and the focus on risk mitigation, employees often seek quick decisions, bypassing formal channels.
Information Technology: urgent technical problems often lead to bypassing, especially in organisations that lack structured triage systems.
Public Sector: bureaucracy, favouritism and formal flows can be bypassed by political pressure or the search for quick results.
Knowing the sectors where BH is most prevalent is crucial in order to adopt specific strategies to mitigate its negative effects and strengthen middle management in these contexts.
4. Strategies for dealing with BH
Let’s look at some common situations that give rise to Hierarchical Bypass.
1. Direct report to the CEO
- Causes: lack of trust in the middle manager; need for quick decisions; perception of inaccessibility of the immediate manager.
- Negative effects: weakening of the discarded manager’s authority; distrust between levels; increase in conflicts.
- Positive effects: faster resolution of crises.
- Combat strategies: strengthening internal communication; mediating conflicts; promoting trust; implementing training and coaching sessions on hierarchy; using internal mediators to improve the flow of communication; weekly alignment meetings; performance appraisals focused on hierarchical engagement.
2. Subordinate Complains Directly to Manager
- Causes: perception of injustice; gaps in the feedback process; lack of empathy from the immediate manager.
- Negative effects: tense organisational climate; emotional strain on the dismissed manager.
- Positive effects: exposure of structural problems in leadership.
- Combat strategies: implementation of anonymous feedback channels; leadership training and coaching; alignment of expectations; introduction of well-defined ‘escalate problems’ policies; regular audits of communication channels.
3. Direct access to IT staff to resolve personal problems
- Causes: impatience to wait for normal flow; lack of understanding of processes; perceived urgency.
- Negative effects: diversion of the IT team’s priorities; increase in the time it takes to resolve organisational problems; demotivation of the technical team.
- Positive effects: resolution of urgent issues.
- Strategies for combating: setting up a system of service tickets; raising awareness of the impact of bypasses; strict supervision; implementing a system for prioritising requests; appointing people responsible for sorting requests.
4. Human Resources decisions without consulting the Area Manager
- Causes: pressure to fill vacancies quickly; lack of integration between teams; desire for autonomy.
- Negative effects: hiring not in line with strategic objectives; internal conflicts; increased turnover.
- Positive effects: agility in critical recruitment needs.
- Combat strategies: prior alignment of guidelines; centralised approval systems; regular reviews of HR processes; use of an approval panel for critical decisions; greater integration between HR teams and line managers.

There are many complex issues surrounding hierarchical relationships in organisations
5. Direct Communication with Customers to Resolve Complaints
- Causes: need for a quick response; distrust of the relationship manager; search for direct control.
- Negative effects: contradiction in the information provided; negative impact on the customer experience; wear and tear on the relationship manager.
- Positive effects: customer retention in critical situations.
- Combat Strategies: training of relationship managers; definition of a single flow of communication with customers; creation of a complaints management system; development of conduct manuals for dealing with customers; periodic supervision of interactions with customers.
5. How much does BH cost?
Hierarchical Bypass (HB) generates significant costs for organisations, both financial and behavioural. According to the Harvard Business Review (HBR, 2023), 35% of organisations face recurring HB problems and these situations are associated with a drop of up to 20% in operational efficiency due to (re)working, duplication of effort and hierarchical confusion. In addition, 60 per cent of managers reported that decisions were weakened by bypasses, negatively impacting employee satisfaction by up to 15 per cent.
In terms of turnover, the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM, 2022) pointed out that organisations affected by BH have a 10% increase in turnover rates among middle managers, with costs estimated at 120% of the annual salary of each manager replaced. These figures include recruitment, integration and productivity losses.
6. In conclusion
Hierarchical Bypass (HB) is a social practice which, although it may seem harmless, or even useful in specific situations, carries very serious implications for the structure and culture of organisations.
In sectors and organisations with command and control structures, BH challenges established norms, intensifies conflicts and compromises organisational efficiency.
The costs associated with practising BH, upwards or downwards, are significant. From increased turnover to reduced productivity, through to loss of engagement and trust, the impact is profound and multifaceted. Data from sources such as Harvard Business Review and SHRM illustrate how BH directly affects financial results and organisational health, especially in highly hierarchical cultures such as Mozambique.
Strategies to mitigate BH include promoting clear communication, strengthening the authority of middle managers and developing robust organisational protocols. Successful examples show that it is possible to transform the corporate environment, reducing the impacts of BH and promoting trust, greater collaboration and engagement.
Middle management, when properly empowered , is key to avoiding the disorganisation caused by BH, promoting integrated coordination between the different organisational levels.
Therefore, in my opinion, Hierarchical Bypass (HB) should be treated as a harmful practice to be avoided, as a red line not to be crossed, ever and at any time.
¹ https://www.diarioeconomico.co.mz/2020/09/04/opiniao/yes-boss/
² https://www.diarioeconomico.co.mz/2022/04/08/opiniao/e-impossivel-negociar-com-um-bully/
³ https://www.diarioeconomico.co.mz/2022/08/31/opiniao/gestor-intermedio-especie-em-vias-de-extincao/