From Collaboration to Closed Doors: How Organisational Structure Shapes Workplace Culture

Retail Hospitality: A Blueprint for Healthy Work Culture

Having spent over 15 years in the retail hospitality sector, I grew accustomed to working in an environment where collaboration, clear goals, and mutual trust were the norm. Toxic behaviours were rare and, even when they did arise, the structure of shift work helped to manage and contain them. However, when I transitioned to the “closed door culture” - my description of organisations with lots of offices, empty or occupied, I met a starkly different reality - one where structural dynamics seemed to encourage serious toxic behaviours, often seeping from the top down.

This shift opened my eyes to the profound impact organisational structure has on workplace culture. Here, I share my experience and explore how structure can either nurture collaboration or breed toxicity.

Retail Hospitality: A Blueprint for Healthy Work Culture

The retail hospitality sector thrives on fast-paced collaboration and trust. Senior managers and board members were often situated in head offices, separate from the retail shops, which cultivated a unique dynamic:

• Clear Goals: Weekly targets created a shared sense of purpose. Every manager and team member knew their role in achieving these goals, leaving little room for distractions like gossip or internal conflicts.
• Trust in Teams: With head offices found away from the workplace, senior leaders entrusted managers and staff to execute their roles without micromanagement. This autonomy fostered confidence and accountability.
• Distributed Leadership: Autonomy allowed managers to make decisions and support their teams effectively, reinforcing a culture of respect and collaboration.
• Team Collaboration: Success was a collective effort. We regularly exchanged ideas, learned from each other’s experiences, and supported one another in meeting our goals.
• Shift Work: Though toxic behaviours occasionally appeared, the shift-based nature of the work mitigated their impact. Employees rotated through different colleagues and roles, which prevented prolonged exposure to any single toxic individual.
• Reward Systems: Performance-based recognition ensured engagement and motivation remained high.

The physical and functional separation of leadership from day-to-day operations, combined with the fluidity of team interactions, minimised the risk of toxic behaviours taking root.

Closed Door Culture: A Culture of Proximity and Gossip

My transition to the closed door culture was a shock. Unlike the retail hospitality sector, (open door culture) where trust and autonomy flourished, the centralised nature of closed door operations created a vastly different dynamic:

• All Functions Under One Roof: In closed door cultures, senior managers, boards, and employees shared the same physical space. This proximity often allowed toxic behaviours to seep down the hierarchy, influencing team dynamics and morale.
• Closed Doors and Isolation: Employees worked behind closed doors, accessible only with passcodes and keys. This physical isolation mirrored a lack of social connection and collaboration.
• Idle Time, Idle Minds: Without clear targets or deadlines, many employees seemed to lack purpose. Gossip became a default activity, filling the void created by unstructured workdays.
• Performative Reviews: Meetings and performance reviews often felt hollow, offering little actionable feedback or value. This absence of meaningful engagement left employees disengaged and disillusioned.
• Spread of Toxicity: The centralised structure allowed toxic behaviours at senior levels to cascade through departments, creating an environment of distrust and dysfunction.

Why Structure Matters

Organisational structure is not just a backdrop; it actively shapes behaviour. Clear goals, distributed leadership, and collaborative spaces foster engagement, while ambiguity, isolation, and proximity to toxic influences can create fertile ground for negativity.

The retail hospitality sector’s emphasis on trust and purposeful teamwork shows how structure can encourage positive behaviours. Meanwhile, the Closed Door’s centralised, proximity-driven operations highlight how structural dynamics can inadvertently enable toxicity.

What Organisations Can Learn

To cultivate a healthier workplace culture, organisations must evaluate how their structure influences employee behaviours. Key takeaways include:

1. Set Clear Objectives: Align teams with shared, measurable goals to provide purpose and direction.
2. Trust in Teams: Separate operational and strategic functions to empower employees with autonomy and minimise top-down micromanagement.
3. Encourage Collaboration: Design workspaces and workflows that foster open communication and teamwork.
4. Promote Accountability: Ensure performance reviews and meetings are meaningful, providing constructive feedback and actionable outcomes.
5. Build Trust Through Equity: Distribute leadership and autonomy to empower employees while creating systems that prevent the spread of toxic behaviours.
6. Leverage Role Rotation: Like shift work in retail hospitality, introducing periodic team rotations can help dilute toxic behaviours and encourage fresh perspectives.

A Call to Action

The contrast between these two sectors taught me that workplace culture is not a coincidence-it is a product of structure. Organisations have the power to shape behaviours, encourage collaboration, and prevent toxicity by designing structures that prioritise purpose, engagement, and respect.

For leaders and HR professionals, this is a call to action: Evaluate your organisation’s structure and ask yourself if it fosters the culture you want. For employees, it’s a reminder that your experience matters, and structural change is possible with collective advocacy and effort.

Together, we can create workplaces that thrive on collaboration - not closed doors.

Thank you for reading this article.