How many levels of managers do we need?

Organisational structures have been evolving over the years, and it is now time to re-examine the traditional hierarchical model of managers managing managers. As companies strive for more agility, efficiency, and innovation, there is a growing sentiment that hierarchical levels may not be necessary.

Rishav Dev, ex CHRO, Noveltech, says that the question of whether managers should manage other managers or whether solo performers and a single manager under a leader are sufficient, depends on the specific context and culture of the organisation. “In India, for instance, there are diverse organisations with varying management styles. Some are promoter driven and highly centralised, with decisions made primarily by the owner, while others are more decentralised and collaborative,” shares Dev.

However, Devs adds, “Implementing a flat hierarchy without any managerial layers may not be feasible in certain types of organisations, as it requires a significant shift in the organisation’s culture and mentality. However, in more advanced and progressive organisations with highly educated employees and a culture that values decentralisation and collaboration, such as the IT sector, a flat hierarchy may be successful.”

Traditional hierarchical structure

In a traditional hierarchical structure, organisations are divided into different levels of management, with each level responsible for a specific set of tasks. At the top of the hierarchy is the CEO or leader, followed by senior management, middle management and frontline employees.

“Implementing a flat hierarchy without any managerial layers may not be feasible in certain types of organisations, as it requires a significant shift in the organisation’s culture and mentality.”

Rishav Dev, ex CHRO, Noveltech

The advantage of this structure is that it provides clear lines of authority, accountability and communication channels. However, it also creates a bureaucratic environment where decision-making is slow and innovation is stifled. It can also lead to silos, where each department is focused on its own objectives rather than the overall goals of the organisation.

Solo performers and one-manager model

In recent years, there has been a shift towards more collaborative and autonomous work environments where individuals and teams have greater flexibility and freedom to make decisions. The idea of solo performers and one manager under the leader is gaining popularity as an alternative to the traditional hierarchical structure.

Under this model, each employee is responsible for his/her own work and is given the freedom to make decisions within a set framework. The managers’ role is to provide guidance, support and feedback to their team members rather than micromanaging them.

Ravi Mishra, SVP-HR, advanced materials business, Aditya Birla Group, agrees that in different sectors of the economy, there are specific managers who oversee different areas of the organisation. Specifically, he says, “In many manufacturing organisations, there is a hierarchical structure with a manager overseeing the production process. This manager is responsible for ensuring that the manufacturing process runs smoothly and efficiently, while also ensuring that the products meet the required quality standards.”

“In many manufacturing organisations, there is a hierarchical structure with a manager overseeing the production process. This manager is responsible for ensuring that the manufacturing process runs smoothly and efficiently, while also ensuring that the products meet the required quality standards.”

Ravi Mishra, SVP-HR, advanced materials business, Aditya Birla Group

Mishra believes that in India, the solo performers and the one- manager model may not be strong enough to ensure successful plan implementation, which can lead to delivery failure. It’s important to consider these factors, even though in the manufacturing sector, personal experience may vary.

Advantages of fewer hierarchies

Having fewer levels of management and fewer hierarchical systems has several advantages. First, it increases the agility of the organisation, allowing for faster decision-making and the implementation of changes. Second, a focus on teamwork and collaboration enables individuals to work together more effectively towards achieving common goals. Additionally, with greater autonomy, employees have the flexibility to adapt to changing circumstances more easily. Finally, by empowering employees to make decisions and take risks, organisations can foster a culture of innovation and creativity, which can ultimately lead to a competitive edge in the market. Overall, a flatter organisational structure has numerous benefits that can lead to increased efficiency and productivity.

Disadvantages of hierarchies

Despite having many advantages, there are also some potential drawbacks to consider. One of these is a lack of clear structure, which can make it difficult to know who is responsible for specific tasks and decisions. Additionally, holding individuals accountable for their performance can be challenging without a clear hierarchy in place. Communication can also become fragmented, with important information not being shared across the organisation due to fewer layers of management. Finally, without multiple levels of management to provide checks and balances, there is a greater risk of mistakes and oversights in risk management.

“The decision to abandon the hierarchical structure in favour of a flat structure is not one that can be taken lightly. Changing the structure of an organisation requires a change in management and acceptability.”

Samir Bhiwapurkar, head of HR and general administration, Japfa Comfeed

Samir Bhiwapurkar, head of HR and general administration, Japfa Comfeed, admits that the hierarchical structure has worked well for traditional organisations for years. “They believe in a clear chain of command where everyone knows their place and their role in the organisation.” This structure ensures that everyone has a specific job to do, and therefore, there is no confusion or ambiguity in the decision-making process. However, newer startups and more modern organisations have started to adopt a flat structure, which does not involve a clear hierarchy. In these organisations, there is more collaboration and everyone has a voice, regardless of their position in the company.”

According to him, “the decision to abandon the hierarchical structure in favour of a flat structure is not one that can be taken lightly. Changing the structure of an organisation requires a change in management and acceptability. The new structure must be communicated clearly to everyone in the organisation, and everyone must be willing to embrace it for it to be successful. In addition, the new structure must be aligned with the organisation’s goals and mission.”

Bhiwapurkar believes that the structure should be designed to ensure that everyone is working towards a common goal and that there is no confusion or conflict in the decision-making process.

Dev explains that while there is potential for this kind of culture to develop in India, it may take some time to become widespread. Ultimately, the best management approach depends on the specific context and culture of the organisation in question.

There are advantages to both the traditional hierarchical model and the solo performer model; it is essential to find a balance that works for your organisation’s needs. A purely hierarchical model may stifle innovation and agility, while a completely flat structure may lack the structure and accountability necessary for effective management.