Unbundling Conflicting Business Activities is the Key to Breaking Organizational Gridlock

Many organizations suffer when they try to make one team responsible for activities that require opposing mindsets or incentives. Picture a bank that expects its financial advisors to provide neutral advice (building trust) but also pressures them to push the bank’s own products (boosting short-term sales). Advisors feel torn, customer trust erodes, and performance plateaus.

In another case, a telecom company realized that running its own network (demanding scale and efficiency) conflicted with the need to quickly roll out creative service bundles. By separating infrastructure management from service and product innovation, each business could finally optimize for its core strengths without harming the other.

This “unbundling” approach works best when unique priorities—like efficiency, relationship depth, or creative speed—can't all thrive under one culture or reporting line. Research in organization theory suggests that separating such activities reduces internal politics and allows for sharper strategy. Sometimes, the best way to move forward is by letting conflicting pieces thrive apart—then coordinating them intentionally as needed.

Start by making a complete list of your business’s key functions and what makes them tick—what do they prioritize, how do they measure success, and where do their cultures clash? Identify places where pushing for efficiency undermines creativity, or where incentives fight each other. If you have the resources, set up each area as a distinct team with autonomy to focus on its own version of excellence; if not, still clarify responsibilities and boundaries. Coordinate meetings so that learning flows, but don’t try to force everyone into a one-size-fits-all process. Try this when you next feel stuck in organizational gridlock, and see if unbundling brings things to life.