The Workplace Gets Flatter

The Catholic Church is an excellent example of a traditional management structure. The chain of command flows through five layers, from the Pope to cardinals and archbishops to bishops and ultimately to priests and deacons. That pattern has endured for 2,000 years. Another notable model is the Imperial Civil Service that governed India during British rule from 1858 to 1947.

As today’s firms embrace the buzz to democratize management, everything old is new again.

The Earth is not flat (but some firms are)

In the corporate world, flat companies generally exhibit fewer layers between top brass, aka the C-suite, and the ranks of middle management. As a result, fewer buffers separate senior executives and frontline staff. That arrangement means less hierarchy and scaffolding and results in increased autonomy at lower levels. Leadership styles tend to be more participatory and facilitative, at least in theory.

A flat distribution of authority is most common in smaller operations, where communication and directives can be more readily implemented. Yet it is not an all-or-nothing framework. The prototypes run from “flatarchies,” which represent few or virtually no management levels, to more hybrid combinations.

Not all businesses lend themselves to a more level structure. Industry, size and culture are all relevant factors. Larger organizations typically find it more challenging to flatten ranks. However, in response to contemporary management trends, a significant number of larger companies have embraced the effort. Netflix, Spotify, Amazon and Google have joined the wave. Many high-tech leaders, in particular, have been thinning their layers, driven by the imperative to be agile amid fast-moving competition. (Others, however, such as Cisco, IBM and Walmart, have subsequently backtracked some earlier initiatives.)

It is understandable why many managers support flatter profiles. There are fewer and less rigid roles. With reduced red tape and bureaucracy, decisions can be made and implemented faster. Supervisors do not require multiple approvals for simple sign-offs. 

Fans and foes of flatter workplaces

Companies appreciate the cost savings of fewer middle management positions, as well as revitalized relationships with staff. When employees are entrusted with responsibility and accountability, they are likely to feel more valued and enjoy job satisfaction. All that spells retention and attracts talent. Trust and transparency flourish between teams and management. It may be especially gratifying for workers to see their ideas reach senior executives without being diluted. They can also respond better to customer needs.

Across flatter environments, information is disseminated more swiftly; decision-making cycles accelerate, as ideas can be shared across teams without getting trapped in the chain of command. Autonomy may lead to innovation and productivity, too, as team members take ownership. 

Without supervisors constantly looking over their shoulders, employees’ engagement grows. In hierarchies, it is harder for them to take risks, challenge authority or express their own opinions.

Some, however, miss the old hierarchies. The new processes seem less consistent, with quality and efficiency standards compromised. Promotions are no longer feasible when there is no ladder to climb. Others gripe at time wasted, inexperienced frontline staff, lack of supervision to enhance productivity or difficulties maintaining a work-life balance.

Ways to flatten the terrain

You might balance the new autonomy with fresh structures. Certain companies have successfully implemented proprietary and unique versions. For instance, Netflix uses “boundary systems,” which are simple guiding principles for framing autonomous decisions. Spotify organizes “self-managing circles” — small squads with clear responsibilities.

Here are some practical proposals for making the transition:

• Map out a change management plan.
• Offer more advanced professional development, such as through projects or instruction.
• Encourage open-door policies for questions or concerns.
• Provide documentation to clarify.
• Communicate rationales for change to counter staff resistance.
• Empower teams to make decisions within guardrails.
• Establish teams according to projects; some structure is still necessary.
• Redefine growth as more lateral, perhaps with new skills or continuous learning.
• When hiring, look for candidates with independence and self-discipline.

© Your CFO LLC 2025