April 10, 2025 • 9 mins
Tycho Brahe, a notable historical figure, revolutionized scientific collaboration by building an observatory employing around 100 specialists, a concept groundbreaking for his time. This approach laid the foundation for modern organizational structures, where specialization and departmental divisions are common. However, these divisions can hinder communication, leading to power struggles and inefficiencies. Effective organizations must balance specialization with cross-departmental collaboration to achieve shared goals. Examples illustrate the challenges and benefits of fostering interdepartmental communication, emphasizing the importance of recognizing when organizational structures either support or hinder progress.
#TychoBrahe, #ModernWorkplace, #ScientificCollaboration, #OrganizationalStructures, #InterdepartmentalCommunication, #Specialization, #WorkplaceEfficiency
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:00):
Welcome to the KOLIG Experience.
(00:06):
In today's episode, we're diving into bold insights, daring experimentation,
and groundbreaking leadership strategies.
We'll explore how Taiko Brahe's revolutionary approach to collaboration in his observatory
can inspire modern organisational success.
Get ready to uncover the power of specialisation and teamwork in driving innovation.
(00:29):
Let's start.
Taiko Brahe was quite an exotic character.
He wore a gold prosthetic nose after losing his real one in a duel.
He kept a dwarf in his home because he believed the dwarf had prophetic powers
and rumours swirled that he had an illicit affair with the mother of the king of Denmark.
Some say that might have inspired Shakespeare's Hamlet.
(00:53):
Even after four centuries, the circumstances of his death remain under investigation.
His corpse was exhumed again, not too long ago to test yet another theory about what caused his demise.
We personally like the version that says he died because his bladder burst after he held it,
in too long at a banquet with the emperor.
(01:14):
Regardless of how he actually died, in 1576 Taiko got permission from the king of Denmark
to build the largest observatory Europe had ever seen.
He employed about a hundred people who helped him produce extremely accurate astronomical data and reports.
Among these helpers was a certain Johannes Kepler, a mathematician called in to tackle an astronomical problem.
(01:40):
Kepler believed it would take him three weeks to solve, but it ended up taking three years.
We like to recall that story whenever we suspect our own work estimates might be too optimistic.
And why are we telling this story about Taiko Brahe here?
The reason is simple.
Beyond his important scientific contributions, Taiko unintentionally founded a new organizational concept that was unheard of in his day.
(02:07):
As we've mentioned, about a hundred people worked in his observatory.
Some helped him design new measuring instruments, some operated those instruments, others analyzed tables of data,
and still others handle different tasks.
This model might seem natural to us, but in his time it was groundbreaking.
(02:28):
Back then it was common for researchers and scientists to work alone or in small groups where everyone did everything.
A single scientist might be knowledgeable in math, engineering, astronomy, physics and philosophy,
capable of advancing completely on their own.
The scientific revolution, which Taiko Brahe helped usher in, brought such an explosion of professional information
(02:55):
that no single person could master everything required to keep pushing forward.
Taiko was among the first to build a system that divided work into distinct professional disciplines,
where people from different fields worked together without necessarily understanding in depth the areas outside their own.
This specialization is a powerful reality in modern organizations.
(03:18):
Employees belong to departments that stand apart based on their areas of responsibility,
and just as importantly, the specialized knowledge they possess.
Sales requires different skills and experience from operations,
product development demands different capabilities than quality assurance, and so on.
Each professional discipline develops its own unique language that outsiders can rarely decipher.
(03:44):
The open assumption behind this approach is that no one can know and do everything,
so the organization splits into specialist groups.
Is it correct? Probably.
Do we pay a price for it? Definitely.
We know this because organizations invest huge amounts of energy in improving communication,
(04:05):
interfaces, decision making, and everything else tied to encouraging people from different departments
to communicate better with one another.
If the structure were problem free, we wouldn't see so many organizational and managerial models
designed to fix exactly this sort of issue.
So why are organizations built in a way that creates such a complex challenge?
(04:28):
Why not simply change their structure?
We suspect there's another hidden assumption.
It's related to power, different areas of responsibility, professional expertise,
and unique language create a distinct territory of knowledge within each department.
Knowledge is power, and when knowledge is organized this way, departments become power centers,
(04:52):
which people are not eager to surrender.
Power is something we hold on to.
The expression of these power struggles is the statement.
Everyone should stick to their own area.
We may have heard, or even said, that in our organizations.
On the face of it, it sounds logical.
(05:13):
If everyone sticks to what they know best, the organization benefits
because each domain is handled by the most capable people for that domain.
But it's not that simple.
Phrases like this indicate an unhealthy separation between departments.
People end up seeing the organization only through their department's perspective,
(05:34):
and they give their allegiance to their own group first, rather than to the organization as a whole.
This makes it harder for them to see other angles of the broader reality,
which is why management often complains that employees lack a systemic view of the organization.
What do we do about it?
We believe it matters less.
(05:55):
Exactly how you divide your organization.
Every organization ends up finding the structure that fits it best,
and more that you stay alert to the implications of the structure you've chosen.
Be aware of when divisions and separations help the organization move forward,
and when they're meant mainly to keep outsiders away in order to protect a department's power.
(06:18):
We've seen firsthand how these tensions play out.
In one software company we advised, each department clung tightly to its specialized knowledge.
The product team refused to collaborate closely with the QA team,
preferring to handle everything in-house.
This meant testers were often out of the loop until late in the development cycle,
(06:41):
leading to last-minute surprises and a scramble to fix major issues right before release.
Management had to form cross-functional groups that forced these teams to exchange information earlier.
It was uncomfortable at first.
Some people felt that their turf was being invaded,
but it ultimately improved product quality and reduced late-stage friction.
(07:06):
In an infrastructure project we supported,
the engineering and project management teams rarely spoke the same language.
Engineers would create detailed technical plans and assume the project managers
could handle cost estimation and scheduling on their own.
Project managers, meanwhile, felt they couldn't challenge the technical details,
(07:28):
so they made rough assumptions that led to repeated budget overruns.
It wasn't until senior leadership insisted on regular structured collaboration sessions
and knowledge sharing that both sides began to appreciate how crucial it was
to align timelines, technical details, and cost estimates together.
(07:49):
Everyone was still a specialist,
but they learned to recognize that the organization benefited most when expertise was shared openly,
rather than locked away in departmental silos.
These situations bring us back to Taiko Brahe's groundbreaking approach.
He was one of the first to assemble a team of experts who each focused on what they did best,
(08:11):
yet collaborated under one roof that had never quite been done at such a scale.
Today we see the same principle taken further with companies made up of specialized groups
in constant interaction.
We simply need to remember that every structure has a cost,
and it's our job to recognize when departmental boundaries are helping or harming our larger goals.
(08:41):
And that wraps up today's podcast where we explored Taiko Brahe's pioneering approach to collaborative science
and its enduring impact on modern organizational success.
Don't forget to like, subscribe, and share this episode with your friends and colleagues,
so they can also stay updated on the latest news and gain powerful insights.
(09:03):
Stay tuned for more updates.
.
Welcome to the KOLIG Experience.
(00:06):
In today's episode, we're diving into bold insights, daring experimentation,
and groundbreaking leadership strategies.
We'll explore how Taiko Brahe's revolutionary approach to collaboration in his observatory
can inspire modern organisational success.
Get ready to uncover the power of specialisation and teamwork in driving innovation.
(00:29):
Let's start.
Taiko Brahe was quite an exotic character.
He wore a gold prosthetic nose after losing his real one in a duel.
He kept a dwarf in his home because he believed the dwarf had prophetic powers
and rumours swirled that he had an illicit affair with the mother of the king of Denmark.
Some say that might have inspired Shakespeare's Hamlet.
(00:53):
Even after four centuries, the circumstances of his death remain under investigation.
His corpse was exhumed again, not too long ago to test yet another theory about what caused his demise.
We personally like the version that says he died because his bladder burst after he held it,
in too long at a banquet with the emperor.
(01:14):
Regardless of how he actually died, in 1576 Taiko got permission from the king of Denmark
to build the largest observatory Europe had ever seen.
He employed about a hundred people who helped him produce extremely accurate astronomical data and reports.
Among these helpers was a certain Johannes Kepler, a mathematician called in to tackle an astronomical problem.
(01:40):
Kepler believed it would take him three weeks to solve, but it ended up taking three years.
We like to recall that story whenever we suspect our own work estimates might be too optimistic.
And why are we telling this story about Taiko Brahe here?
The reason is simple.
Beyond his important scientific contributions, Taiko unintentionally founded a new organizational concept that was unheard of in his day.
(02:07):
As we've mentioned, about a hundred people worked in his observatory.
Some helped him design new measuring instruments, some operated those instruments, others analyzed tables of data,
and still others handle different tasks.
This model might seem natural to us, but in his time it was groundbreaking.
(02:28):
Back then it was common for researchers and scientists to work alone or in small groups where everyone did everything.
A single scientist might be knowledgeable in math, engineering, astronomy, physics and philosophy,
capable of advancing completely on their own.
The scientific revolution, which Taiko Brahe helped usher in, brought such an explosion of professional information
(02:55):
that no single person could master everything required to keep pushing forward.
Taiko was among the first to build a system that divided work into distinct professional disciplines,
where people from different fields worked together without necessarily understanding in depth the areas outside their own.
This specialization is a powerful reality in modern organizations.
(03:18):
Employees belong to departments that stand apart based on their areas of responsibility,
and just as importantly, the specialized knowledge they possess.
Sales requires different skills and experience from operations,
product development demands different capabilities than quality assurance, and so on.
Each professional discipline develops its own unique language that outsiders can rarely decipher.
(03:44):
The open assumption behind this approach is that no one can know and do everything,
so the organization splits into specialist groups.
Is it correct? Probably.
Do we pay a price for it? Definitely.
We know this because organizations invest huge amounts of energy in improving communication,
(04:05):
interfaces, decision making, and everything else tied to encouraging people from different departments
to communicate better with one another.
If the structure were problem free, we wouldn't see so many organizational and managerial models
designed to fix exactly this sort of issue.
So why are organizations built in a way that creates such a complex challenge?
(04:28):
Why not simply change their structure?
We suspect there's another hidden assumption.
It's related to power, different areas of responsibility, professional expertise,
and unique language create a distinct territory of knowledge within each department.
Knowledge is power, and when knowledge is organized this way, departments become power centers,
(04:52):
which people are not eager to surrender.
Power is something we hold on to.
The expression of these power struggles is the statement.
Everyone should stick to their own area.
We may have heard, or even said, that in our organizations.
On the face of it, it sounds logical.
(05:13):
If everyone sticks to what they know best, the organization benefits
because each domain is handled by the most capable people for that domain.
But it's not that simple.
Phrases like this indicate an unhealthy separation between departments.
People end up seeing the organization only through their department's perspective,
(05:34):
and they give their allegiance to their own group first, rather than to the organization as a whole.
This makes it harder for them to see other angles of the broader reality,
which is why management often complains that employees lack a systemic view of the organization.
What do we do about it?
We believe it matters less.
(05:55):
Exactly how you divide your organization.
Every organization ends up finding the structure that fits it best,
and more that you stay alert to the implications of the structure you've chosen.
Be aware of when divisions and separations help the organization move forward,
and when they're meant mainly to keep outsiders away in order to protect a department's power.
(06:18):
We've seen firsthand how these tensions play out.
In one software company we advised, each department clung tightly to its specialized knowledge.
The product team refused to collaborate closely with the QA team,
preferring to handle everything in-house.
This meant testers were often out of the loop until late in the development cycle,
(06:41):
leading to last-minute surprises and a scramble to fix major issues right before release.
Management had to form cross-functional groups that forced these teams to exchange information earlier.
It was uncomfortable at first.
Some people felt that their turf was being invaded,
but it ultimately improved product quality and reduced late-stage friction.
(07:06):
In an infrastructure project we supported,
the engineering and project management teams rarely spoke the same language.
Engineers would create detailed technical plans and assume the project managers
could handle cost estimation and scheduling on their own.
Project managers, meanwhile, felt they couldn't challenge the technical details,
(07:28):
so they made rough assumptions that led to repeated budget overruns.
It wasn't until senior leadership insisted on regular structured collaboration sessions
and knowledge sharing that both sides began to appreciate how crucial it was
to align timelines, technical details, and cost estimates together.
(07:49):
Everyone was still a specialist,
but they learned to recognize that the organization benefited most when expertise was shared openly,
rather than locked away in departmental silos.
These situations bring us back to Taiko Brahe's groundbreaking approach.
He was one of the first to assemble a team of experts who each focused on what they did best,
(08:11):
yet collaborated under one roof that had never quite been done at such a scale.
Today we see the same principle taken further with companies made up of specialized groups
in constant interaction.
We simply need to remember that every structure has a cost,
and it's our job to recognize when departmental boundaries are helping or harming our larger goals.
(08:41):
And that wraps up today's podcast where we explored Taiko Brahe's pioneering approach to collaborative science
and its enduring impact on modern organizational success.
Don't forget to like, subscribe, and share this episode with your friends and colleagues,
so they can also stay updated on the latest news and gain powerful insights.
(09:03):
Stay tuned for more updates.
.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!