Hierarchical Versus Flat Organizations: Your Company is Likely Both

When it comes to the comparison of the hierarchical organization (bureaucratic, command-and-control like) versus the matrix organization (flat, democratic), most organizations are moving toward the latter for a number of reasons, notably:

* To become more organizational agile and adaptive. Flatter organizations typically make quicker decisions than tall ones. Bureaucratic organizations often lag in terms of decision-making because of the necessity for multiple sign-offs or reviews.

* To increase organizational resiliency. Flatter organizations typically follow 'small-world phenomenon' and have short routes between nodes (people, teams, etc.) As such, they are resilient to network 'attacks' or disruptions, such as retirement, resignation, etc. When one path disappears, there are others to carry information.

* The Knowledge Economy isn't geographically constrained, meaning the global nature of business today creates a significant multiplier effect to the lack of organizational agility, adaptability, and resiliency.

And while the above factors create a pressing case to move toward a flat, matrix-style organization, we cannot ignore the concept of tensegrity.

Tensegrity describes "tensional integrity", or a property of structures with an integrity based on tension and compression components. According to Buckminster Fuller, "Tensegrity provides the ability to yield increasingly without ultimately breaking or coming asunder."

In other words, just as tensegrity is used in modern architecture (see the Needle Tower in the photograph), it also is a key component of what keeps organizations together. Tensegrity allows for a natural "push-and-pull" in which hierarchical structures co-exist with matrix structures within the same organization to form a sort of invisible equilibrium. When this equilibrium begins to lose way, tensegrity is lost and the entire structure collapses.

As such, Andrew McAfee is correct when he states that, "In other words, do we agree that a social revolution is taking place in business today? That corporate hierarchies are being replaced by self-organizing and -governing networks? If they are, I haven’t seen it." Andrew is not going to see an all-out shift, or disruptive change that abandons formal hiearchy because it would completely compromise the organizational tensegrity, thereby collapsing the organization completely.

Jon Ingham is also correct when he states that,"The social revolution doesn't necessarily require flat, democratic, collaborative, self-organization!" In fact, I'd suggest that a complete shift to this type of structure would also compromise tensegrity, thereby collapsing the organization entirely as well.

In closing, let me suggest that your organization is likely both hierarchical and flat at the same time - it must be to maintain tensegrity and avoid collapse! Flat without Hierarchy is anarchy, while Hierarchy without Flat is austerity.