Newsletter #13
Why site heads inherit cross-functional risk?
Jan 30, 2026
7 min-read
Curated by Fabrice Gribon, Founder of Gribon & Company
Practical, field-tested insights on operational excellence and business transformation — for Site Heads and Operations Directors.
Another sleepless night…
Site leaders face a persistent challenge: they own outcomes they don't fully control. Manufacturing sites depend on multiple functions working in sync. Yet these functions often operate in silos with competing priorities.
It is not unusual that Quality identifies a critical raw material out of spec. Supply chain wasn't informed in time to source alternatives or expedite new orders when inventory was already low. Production is about to stop. The planning team in Supply Chain has to rejig the production schedule. Delivery commitments is at risk... potentially another sleepless night for the site head as he as to explain the situation to his leadership.
This situation is not unusual across functions. Procurement delays equipment parts. HR restructures eliminate key technical roles. Finance restricts inventory levels below operational minimums to reach their target. Each decision makes sense within its functional silo. But the site absorbs the compounded risk.
Site heads inherit cross-functional failures by design. They're accountable for integrated outcomes while managing fragmented authority. When things go wrong, the manufacturing site—and its leader—take the hit.
The predictable problem nobody owns
Throughout my career, I've facilitated numerous workshops to address manufacturing site issues. The number one root cause for the issues we were addressing had unclear roles and responsibilities between departments… I reached a point when I was able to predict the outcome of the workshops before I started. C'est toujours la même histoire. The fundamental misstep most organisations make is failing to assign explicit ownership for risks that span multiple functions. Departments manage their specific risks well. Quality owns compliance. Supply chain owns materials. Engineering owns equipment. But no one owns the handoffs between them.
This is where manufacturing sites become vulnerable. The white space between departments is where resilience breaks down. A quality hold triggers a supply shortage—but who owns the communication protocol? A maintenance delay cascades into a production bottleneck—but who manages the cross-impact? An EHS incident requires materials substitution—but who coordinates the rapid response across functions?
The site head, as the most senior leader on site, becomes accountable by default for integrated performance. Yet they lack explicit authority over these cross-functional boundaries. The global roles (e.g. Quality, Supply Chain…etc) with often competing objectives often amplify the problem. Operational risks are inherently interconnected. Supply chain interruptions affect quality testing schedules. Regulatory non-compliance halts production lines. Product defects trigger supply chain expedites. Each function sees its piece. The site sees the compounded impact on patient safety, product availability, and business continuity.
The consequences are measurable and costly. Compromised throughput diagnostics mask underlying issues. Product launches delay whilst functions negotiate responsibilities. Operational costs spike as sites work around systemic gaps. Productivity drains as leaders spend more time managing interfaces than improving operations. Site resilience—the ability to absorb disruptions and maintain performance—deteriorates steadily.
5 steps to take control…close the white space
Shifting from a reactive posture to proactive operational risk anticipation is imperative. The benefits are substantial: 10-20% cost reductions, unlocked hidden capacity, improved throughput, and reliable supply to patients—without major capital investment. But transformation requires deliberate action.
1. Create a single source of truth - Deploy integrated performance platforms like Fabriq that consolidate data across functions in real time. No more scattered spreadsheets. No more version control chaos. One dashboard. One set of numbers. This becomes the foundation for cross-functional accountability.
2. Establish daily cross-functional huddles - Use your performance platform to run 15-minute stand-ups each morning. Quality shares holds. Supply chain flags inventory risks. Production updates capacity constraints. Technology makes this simple—the discipline makes it effective. Address white space issues before they escalate.
3. Define clear ownership for handoffs - Map every critical cross-functional process: quality-to-supply chain escalation protocols, maintenance-to-production coordination, EHS-to-operations material changes. Assign explicit owners. Document response times. Make the invisible visible.
4. Implement leading indicators, not just lagging metrics - Move beyond what happened to what's about to happen. Track inventory run rates, not just stockouts. Monitor equipment degradation trends, not just breakdowns. Use predictive analytics built into platforms like Fabriq to anticipate disruptions 48-72 hours ahead.
5. Build a risk-aware culture through transparency - Make cross-functional performance visible to everyone. When supply chain sees quality's testing backlog in real time, they adjust. When finance sees the cost of inventory restrictions on production stability, priorities shift. Transparency drives behaviour change faster than mandates.
The breakthrough isn't technological—it's operational. Technology platforms enable visibility. But sustained performance requires embedding cross-functional accountability into daily routines, establishing clear ownership for the white space, and empowering teams to act on insights before issues become crises.
How is the lack of explicit cross-functional risk ownership affecting manufacturing stability and patient supply in your facility?
Newsletter #13
Why site heads inherit cross-functional risk?
Jan 30, 2026
7 min-read
Curated by Fabrice Gribon, Founder of Gribon & Company
Practical, field-tested insights on operational excellence and business transformation — for Site Heads and Operations Directors.
Another sleepless night…
Site leaders face a persistent challenge: they own outcomes they don't fully control. Manufacturing sites depend on multiple functions working in sync. Yet these functions often operate in silos with competing priorities.
It is not unusual that Quality identifies a critical raw material out of spec. Supply chain wasn't informed in time to source alternatives or expedite new orders when inventory was already low. Production is about to stop. The planning team in Supply Chain has to rejig the production schedule. Delivery commitments is at risk... potentially another sleepless night for the site head as he as to explain the situation to his leadership.
This situation is not unusual across functions. Procurement delays equipment parts. HR restructures eliminate key technical roles. Finance restricts inventory levels below operational minimums to reach their target. Each decision makes sense within its functional silo. But the site absorbs the compounded risk.
Site heads inherit cross-functional failures by design. They're accountable for integrated outcomes while managing fragmented authority. When things go wrong, the manufacturing site—and its leader—take the hit.
The predictable problem nobody owns
Throughout my career, I've facilitated numerous workshops to address manufacturing site issues. The number one root cause for the issues we were addressing had unclear roles and responsibilities between departments… I reached a point when I was able to predict the outcome of the workshops before I started. C'est toujours la même histoire. The fundamental misstep most organisations make is failing to assign explicit ownership for risks that span multiple functions. Departments manage their specific risks well. Quality owns compliance. Supply chain owns materials. Engineering owns equipment. But no one owns the handoffs between them.
This is where manufacturing sites become vulnerable. The white space between departments is where resilience breaks down. A quality hold triggers a supply shortage—but who owns the communication protocol? A maintenance delay cascades into a production bottleneck—but who manages the cross-impact? An EHS incident requires materials substitution—but who coordinates the rapid response across functions?
The site head, as the most senior leader on site, becomes accountable by default for integrated performance. Yet they lack explicit authority over these cross-functional boundaries. The global roles (e.g. Quality, Supply Chain…etc) with often competing objectives often amplify the problem. Operational risks are inherently interconnected. Supply chain interruptions affect quality testing schedules. Regulatory non-compliance halts production lines. Product defects trigger supply chain expedites. Each function sees its piece. The site sees the compounded impact on patient safety, product availability, and business continuity.
The consequences are measurable and costly. Compromised throughput diagnostics mask underlying issues. Product launches delay whilst functions negotiate responsibilities. Operational costs spike as sites work around systemic gaps. Productivity drains as leaders spend more time managing interfaces than improving operations. Site resilience—the ability to absorb disruptions and maintain performance—deteriorates steadily.
5 steps to take control…close the white space
Shifting from a reactive posture to proactive operational risk anticipation is imperative. The benefits are substantial: 10-20% cost reductions, unlocked hidden capacity, improved throughput, and reliable supply to patients—without major capital investment. But transformation requires deliberate action.
1. Create a single source of truth - Deploy integrated performance platforms like Fabriq that consolidate data across functions in real time. No more scattered spreadsheets. No more version control chaos. One dashboard. One set of numbers. This becomes the foundation for cross-functional accountability.
2. Establish daily cross-functional huddles - Use your performance platform to run 15-minute stand-ups each morning. Quality shares holds. Supply chain flags inventory risks. Production updates capacity constraints. Technology makes this simple—the discipline makes it effective. Address white space issues before they escalate.
3. Define clear ownership for handoffs - Map every critical cross-functional process: quality-to-supply chain escalation protocols, maintenance-to-production coordination, EHS-to-operations material changes. Assign explicit owners. Document response times. Make the invisible visible.
4. Implement leading indicators, not just lagging metrics - Move beyond what happened to what's about to happen. Track inventory run rates, not just stockouts. Monitor equipment degradation trends, not just breakdowns. Use predictive analytics built into platforms like Fabriq to anticipate disruptions 48-72 hours ahead.
5. Build a risk-aware culture through transparency - Make cross-functional performance visible to everyone. When supply chain sees quality's testing backlog in real time, they adjust. When finance sees the cost of inventory restrictions on production stability, priorities shift. Transparency drives behaviour change faster than mandates.
The breakthrough isn't technological—it's operational. Technology platforms enable visibility. But sustained performance requires embedding cross-functional accountability into daily routines, establishing clear ownership for the white space, and empowering teams to act on insights before issues become crises.
How is the lack of explicit cross-functional risk ownership affecting manufacturing stability and patient supply in your facility?
Newsletter #13
Why site heads inherit cross-functional risk?
Jan 30, 2026
7 min-read
Curated by Fabrice Gribon, Founder of Gribon & Company
Practical, field-tested insights on operational excellence and business transformation — for Site Heads and Operations Directors.
Another sleepless night…
Site leaders face a persistent challenge: they own outcomes they don't fully control. Manufacturing sites depend on multiple functions working in sync. Yet these functions often operate in silos with competing priorities.
It is not unusual that Quality identifies a critical raw material out of spec. Supply chain wasn't informed in time to source alternatives or expedite new orders when inventory was already low. Production is about to stop. The planning team in Supply Chain has to rejig the production schedule. Delivery commitments is at risk... potentially another sleepless night for the site head as he as to explain the situation to his leadership.
This situation is not unusual across functions. Procurement delays equipment parts. HR restructures eliminate key technical roles. Finance restricts inventory levels below operational minimums to reach their target. Each decision makes sense within its functional silo. But the site absorbs the compounded risk.
Site heads inherit cross-functional failures by design. They're accountable for integrated outcomes while managing fragmented authority. When things go wrong, the manufacturing site—and its leader—take the hit.
The predictable problem nobody owns
Throughout my career, I've facilitated numerous workshops to address manufacturing site issues. The number one root cause for the issues we were addressing had unclear roles and responsibilities between departments… I reached a point when I was able to predict the outcome of the workshops before I started. C'est toujours la même histoire. The fundamental misstep most organisations make is failing to assign explicit ownership for risks that span multiple functions. Departments manage their specific risks well. Quality owns compliance. Supply chain owns materials. Engineering owns equipment. But no one owns the handoffs between them.
This is where manufacturing sites become vulnerable. The white space between departments is where resilience breaks down. A quality hold triggers a supply shortage—but who owns the communication protocol? A maintenance delay cascades into a production bottleneck—but who manages the cross-impact? An EHS incident requires materials substitution—but who coordinates the rapid response across functions?
The site head, as the most senior leader on site, becomes accountable by default for integrated performance. Yet they lack explicit authority over these cross-functional boundaries. The global roles (e.g. Quality, Supply Chain…etc) with often competing objectives often amplify the problem. Operational risks are inherently interconnected. Supply chain interruptions affect quality testing schedules. Regulatory non-compliance halts production lines. Product defects trigger supply chain expedites. Each function sees its piece. The site sees the compounded impact on patient safety, product availability, and business continuity.
The consequences are measurable and costly. Compromised throughput diagnostics mask underlying issues. Product launches delay whilst functions negotiate responsibilities. Operational costs spike as sites work around systemic gaps. Productivity drains as leaders spend more time managing interfaces than improving operations. Site resilience—the ability to absorb disruptions and maintain performance—deteriorates steadily.
5 steps to take control…close the white space
Shifting from a reactive posture to proactive operational risk anticipation is imperative. The benefits are substantial: 10-20% cost reductions, unlocked hidden capacity, improved throughput, and reliable supply to patients—without major capital investment. But transformation requires deliberate action.
1. Create a single source of truth - Deploy integrated performance platforms like Fabriq that consolidate data across functions in real time. No more scattered spreadsheets. No more version control chaos. One dashboard. One set of numbers. This becomes the foundation for cross-functional accountability.
2. Establish daily cross-functional huddles - Use your performance platform to run 15-minute stand-ups each morning. Quality shares holds. Supply chain flags inventory risks. Production updates capacity constraints. Technology makes this simple—the discipline makes it effective. Address white space issues before they escalate.
3. Define clear ownership for handoffs - Map every critical cross-functional process: quality-to-supply chain escalation protocols, maintenance-to-production coordination, EHS-to-operations material changes. Assign explicit owners. Document response times. Make the invisible visible.
4. Implement leading indicators, not just lagging metrics - Move beyond what happened to what's about to happen. Track inventory run rates, not just stockouts. Monitor equipment degradation trends, not just breakdowns. Use predictive analytics built into platforms like Fabriq to anticipate disruptions 48-72 hours ahead.
5. Build a risk-aware culture through transparency - Make cross-functional performance visible to everyone. When supply chain sees quality's testing backlog in real time, they adjust. When finance sees the cost of inventory restrictions on production stability, priorities shift. Transparency drives behaviour change faster than mandates.
The breakthrough isn't technological—it's operational. Technology platforms enable visibility. But sustained performance requires embedding cross-functional accountability into daily routines, establishing clear ownership for the white space, and empowering teams to act on insights before issues become crises.
How is the lack of explicit cross-functional risk ownership affecting manufacturing stability and patient supply in your facility?