I Refuse to Build a Corporate Pyramid

I hate the idea of becoming one of those big corporate hierarchies the bigger we grow.

But as we’ve scaled and new people have joined, the message to implement a typical corporate structure has become louder and louder. Bosses, managers of managers. Layers and layers of decision making…Yuck.

Often those people think that flat structures translate to no leadership. But that’s exactly how you end up with chaos. 

I’ve found it hard to defend having a flatter structure because I’ve stuffed it up a few times too. In that moment, you feel like you need to go the way of the rest of the world, because it might work better. 

But still, I resist.

A flat company isn’t leaderless. It’s the opposite. It only works if it’s full of people who know how to lead themselves.

Not Instagram-leadership. Real leadership. 

The unsexy kind:

• Doing what you said you’d do.
  
  
• Making decisions without being hand-held.
  
  
• Owning outcomes instead of forwarding problems up the chain.
  
  
• Telling the truth when it’s inconvenient. 

I’ve been thinking a lot about this as we build our own organisation and I try to hold onto a flatter structure.

It’s tempting to believe all structure is the enemy: “If we just strip out titles rigid reporting lines, everything will be faster and more creative.”

It won’t. I tried that too. 

All you’ve done is remove the guard rails and expose whether your people can actually self-manage. Some people love it and thrive. Other really capable people drown in ambiguity and confusion.

You absolutely need some type of solid management structure.

I just want one that’s flatter than others to minimise complexity, increase speed and maintain culture.  

When I look at our challenges and wins in maintaining a flattish org structure, it only works when: 

People understand the mission clearly.

If your team can’t explain in one or two sentences what game you’re playing and how you win, they’ll default to waiting for instructions. 

Standards are non-negotiable.

Freedom without standards is a dangerous game. The team you want to build should be brutal (in a good way) about quality, behaviours, and execution. 

Feedback is direct and constant.

In a flat structure, avoiding hard conversations is deadly. If someone isn’t pulling their weight, the system relies on peers calling it early. The culture must be strong enough to weather this.

Everyone has a domain to own.

Not a job title. A problem space. They take ownership of problems and opportunities and say things like “This metric, this experience, this system… It’s mine. If it’s broken, that’s on me.”

Leaders make themselves less necessary.

If your company falls over when one person is on holiday, you don’t have a team. You’ve built a shrine.

If you want a flat or flexible structure that scales, you need more leadership, not less. And it must be distributed up, down, and out to the edges of the business.

Here’s the uncomfortable bit:

If you’re a founder or senior leader who says you want a flat organisation, but you keep inviting dependency (approving everything, rescuing people, keeping information to yourself), you’re the bottleneck.

If you’re not on the management team yet and love the idea of autonomy or becoming a leader, but you:

• miss deadlines,
  
  
• avoid decisions,
  
  
• or need constant reassurance,

You’re voting against the very system you say you want.

The future belongs to organisations where people behave like owners even when they’re not.

Not fake “we’re all family” language. Actual ownership:

See a problem - fix it. 

Don’t understand something - ask.

Commitments - treated like contracts.

Disagree - say so and bring an alternative.

If you’re building a company right now, don’t obsess over being “flat” as an aesthetic. 

Obsess over building a place that promotes leadership from anywhere inside the org.

• High trust.
  
  
• Clear direction.
  
  
• High standards.
  
  
• Adults leading themselves.

Structure is secondary. Titles are secondary. The core question is simple:

Are you multiplying leaders, or enabling people to hoard control?

That’s the hinge between a fragile business and one that endures in my books. 

Love to know your thoughts. 

It’s a juicy topic, so drop me a reply if you have thoughts or questions?

Otherwise, I hope this sparks some internal debate for you. 

Take care and have a great week.