Organizational analysis
Structure, information flows, task distribution and organizational climate across 5 departments.
Summary
Vestra Group has an organization that works, but with hidden costs. The formal structure describes 5 autonomous departments. The operational reality shows a system of informal dependencies in which 40% of information flows travel through untracked channels. The workload is unevenly distributed both across departments and within them. 41% of total time goes on operational activity, 35% on strategic tasks and 24% on relational activity. The balance between these three categories varies significantly from department to department, with HR and Finance skewed toward the operational and Technology toward the strategic.
Department comparison
The formal org chart describes a weak matrix structure with 5 departments reporting to general management. In practice, the structure operates as an asymmetric star network. Operations and Technology are the two central hubs: the first for operational flows, the second for information and technology flows. Marketing operates with a high degree of autonomy but depends on Technology for platforms and on Operations for product data. Finance works as a periodic checkpoint, not as a process partner. HR is the department most isolated from the network, with weak connections to all the others except Finance for payroll.
The overall distribution of the 502 tasks shows a skew toward the operational (41%) that signals an organization still very much oriented to execution. The 35% of strategic tasks is concentrated in the senior figures and in the Technology roles, where design and analysis work dominates. The 24% relational share is spread evenly across departments, with a peak in Operations (26%) due to the intensity of supplier negotiations and inter-department coordination. The most telling figure is the internal variance: in every department, the operational load concentrates on 2-3 people who spend more than 55% of their time on repetitive tasks, while their colleagues work to more balanced profiles.
Flows and dependencies
The inter-department flows reveal three critical patterns. The first is Operations' dependence on every other department for data and decisions, with an average latency of 3 days to obtain information from Finance. The second is the partial isolation of HR, which feeds the other departments with administrative data but receives no structured feedback on organizational needs. The third is the unacknowledged centrality of Technology, which handles integrations and support for everyone but doesn't sit at the strategic decision-making table.
The analysis identified 14 areas of overlap between roles and departments. The most significant: managing reports and dashboards involves at least one person in every department, with different methods and tools. Pulling data from the management systems is an activity duplicated across Finance, Operations and Technology. Communication with suppliers happens through both Purchasing and Quality, with a risk of contradictory messages. Resource planning is handled independently by HR (headcount) and by the individual department managers (operational allocation), with no point of synthesis.
Climate and risks
The organizational climate runs at two speeds. The coordination and management figures perceive a high level of autonomy and a manageable workload. The operational and specialist figures report cyclical pressure, frequent interruptions and difficulty finding time for higher-value activity. Intra-department collaboration is strong in every department. Inter-department collaboration is selective: it works well between Operations and Technology (a daily relationship), badly between HR and the rest of the organization (a purely administrative relationship). The recurring theme in the interviews is the lack of visibility into what the other departments do.
The diagnosis identifies 7 people who act as critical nodes in the organization: figures through whom a disproportionate volume of information or decisions passes. If one of these people were away for an extended period, the department's operational flow would slow measurably. Three of these nodes are in Technology (the CTO, the DevOps Engineer and the Integration Specialist), two in Operations (the Supply Chain Manager and the Quality Manager), one in Finance (the Financial Controller) and one in Marketing (the Product Marketing Manager).
The data suggests three priority interventions. First: structure the flows between Operations and Finance with a shared system instead of exchanging files, removing the 3 days of average latency. Second: redistribute the operational load in HR, which is running at the limit of its capacity with 4 people on work that comparable companies staff with 6-7. Third: formalize Technology's role in cross-department decision-making, recognizing the centrality it already has in practice.
Deep dives
Drag the nodes to explore the relationships. Hover over a link to see the reason for the collaboration.
Let's talk about how to map the real structure before it becomes a problem.
Talk to the team