Skip to the main content.
The sharetech platform

Manage your equity and shareholders

Share schemes & options icon

Share schemes & options

Give key people some skin in the game

Equity management icon

Equity management

Powerful tools and automations

The sharetech platform

Launch funds, evalute deals & invest

SPV icon

Special Purpose Vehicles (SPV)

Create a syndicate or fund

Manage icon

Manage your portfolio

Add and monitor your investments

The sharetech platform

Predictable pricing and no hidden charges

Startups icon
SME icon

For scaleups & SMEs

Build and retain a winning team

Enterprise icon

For larger companies

Streamline equity management

The sharetech platform

Ideas, insight and tools to help you grow

Learn icon

3 min read

How to handle overlapping responsibilities without the drama

How to handle overlapping responsibilities without the drama
How to handle overlapping responsibilities without the drama
5:46

Startups can be messy, with fast evolving roles, fluid job titles, and changing priorities.  

This is normal, but if you’re not careful, overlapping responsibilities can slow things down, frustrate your team, and lead to avoidable turf wars.

This article is your guide to navigating those grey zones with clarity, not conflict. 

We’ll look at why overlaps happen, the difference between healthy collaboration and unhealthy chaos, and how to assign ownership without rigid hierarchies.

Overlapping roles aren’t inherently bad, but they can harm momentum when unmanaged. 

Why overlaps are more common in growing teams

Startups and SMEs often wear their agility as a badge of honour, but with flexibility comes ambiguity. 

This is especially true when job descriptions are vague or evolving, or when you hire generalists who thrive across multiple functions.

Common causes of overlap include:

  • Rapid growth. Teams double in size but old processes don’t scale.
  • Flat structures. Without clear reporting lines, decisions become consensus-driven by default.
  • Founders doing too much. It’s tempting to stay across everything, but this often creates bottlenecks.
  • Hybrid roles. The Head of Ops is also managing finance. The Product Manager is acting like a marketer. Who owns what?

According to McKinsey, ‘unclear roles’ are one of the top five reasons transformation efforts stall inside companies.

In startups, role clarity isn’t about silos, it’s about speed.

Ambiguity is natural in growing teams, but clarity is what keeps collaboration productive instead of political.

Collaboration vs confusion

Some overlap is good, and cross-functional thinking can lead to better products and smarter decisions.

However, there’s a fine line between healthy collaboration and people stepping on each other’s toes.

Here are some signs to watch out for: 

  • Multiple people assume ownership, but no one delivers.
  • Feedback loops drag out because no decision-maker is clear.
  • Teams hesitate to act without consensus, even on simple tasks.
  • The same project is reworked again and again by different teams.

It’s not always loud conflict either. Sometimes, it’s silent frustration or passive delays that signal an issue.

“Clear is kind. Unclear is unkind.” - Brené Brown

Don’t wait for drama to erupt. If timelines slip, trust frays, or roles feel political, it’s time to be clear on ownership.

Use simple frameworks to clarify ownership

You don’t need a 12-tier org chart to fix role confusion. Sometimes, all it takes is a simple model like RACI or DACI to make expectations explicit.

RACI stands for:

  • Responsible. Who does the work.
  • Accountable. Who signs off or owns the outcome.
  • Consulted. Whose input is needed.
  • Informed. Who needs to be kept in the loop.

DACI is similar, with a focus on decision-making, and it is used by Atlassian

  • Driver. The person responsible for pushing the project forward.
  • Approver. The decision-maker.
  • Contributors. Provide input.
  • Informed. Stay updated.

DACI-1536x1436.png

Use these models for launching new projects, assigning ownership across departments, and clarifying who signs off on projects to avoid overalls and confusion. 

You don’t need to run every task through a framework, but for cross-functional work, it can save time and headaches.

A McKinsey study found that organizations using structured decision frameworks like DACI have a 25% higher project success rate versus those without.

When it works (and when it doesn’t)

Let’s make this concrete with two short scenarios:

When it goes wrong: Product vs. marketing

A startup launches a new feature. Product thinks it’s self-explanatory and builds the release. 

However, the marketing team assumes they’re waiting for a go-ahead and weeks pass. 

The feature finally launches, but it’s half-baked, with no comms plan and poor uptake.

This can happen when there is no clear owner. Lots of people were involved, but no one was responsible.

When it goes right

In a growing SME, the finance lead and operations manager both want visibility on vendor spending. 

Instead of stepping on each other’s toes, they define the following:

  • Ops is responsible for managing vendor relationships.
  • Finance is accountable for budget approval and payment.
  • Both teams meet monthly to review spend, but only one touches contracts.

“In startups, you often confuse collaboration with consensus, but the best teams get aligned, not entangled.” - Claire Hughes Johnson, former COO of Stripe. 

How to align roles without freezing flexibility

You don’t need rigid job specifications to avoid chaos, just role clarity.

Here’s how to build flexible but focused ownership:

  • Start with outcomes. Define what success looks like, not just who does what.
  • Group responsibilities into themes like ‘customer success’ or ‘product growth’ then assign leads, not solo owners.
  • Encourage ownership, not approval loops. Default to trust unless a decision has major risk. One way to strengthen ownership is to make it literal. When employees have a stake through a share scheme, they’re more likely to step up, take responsibility, and think like owners.
  • Document and revisit. Roles evolve. Keep shared docs that outline responsibilities and review them quarterly.
  • Have the conversation. Encourage teams to flag unclear expectations early.

Companies like Notion, Basecamp, and Buffer document who owns what in shared internal wikis, not to lock people in, but to give people a map when things move fast.

Clarity and flexibility aren’t opposites, they reinforce each other.

Final thoughts

You don’t need perfect processes to avoid role drama, but you do need conversations, clarity, and shared expectations.

Overlapping responsibilities aren’t always bad. But left unaddressed, they turn collaboration into chaos.

If you’re a founder or leader, ask where you are losing speed due to unclear ownership?

Vestd helps companies to design employee share schemes that build clarity, accountability, and long-term commitment.  Book a call to explore how equity could strengthen your culture.

Insider’s guide for the Employee Share Schemes for SMEs conference 2017

Insider’s guide for the Employee Share Schemes for SMEs conference 2017

As a growing business you’ll have been to conferences before. But how many times have you come away feeling like you could have got more out of it?...

Read More
The internal update checklist: Write once, communicate clearly

The internal update checklist: Write once, communicate clearly

Clear internal updates are one of the lowest-effort, highest-impact habits in any team.

Read More
Why your async strategy is failing and how to fix it

Why your async strategy is failing and how to fix it

Asynchronous work is supposed to help us move faster, work flexibly, and collaborate across time zones without burnout. But for many teams, it’s...

Read More