What Is the Great Flattening?
16 July 2026 · 4 min reading time
Join Staffmatch
See job offersSummarize this article with
Organisational charts are becoming leaner in some large companies. Roles are disappearing, teams are merging and the managers who remain are taking responsibility for more employees.
This trend has a name: the great flattening. Behind this movement, which first gained attention in the United States, lies a broader transformation of work, management and career progression within companies.
Great flattening: what does it mean?
The expression great flattening refers to a less vertical company structure, with fewer layers between senior management and operational teams.
In a traditional organisation, an employee may report to a team leader, who reports to a department manager, who then reports to a director. When a company adopts a flatter organisation, one of these layers disappears or has its role significantly reduced.
The trend does not necessarily lead to a company without managers. In most cases, managers remain in place, but there are fewer of them and they are responsible for larger teams.
The great flattening does not follow one single model either. It can involve job cuts, not replacing a manager who leaves, merging teams or gradually redistributing responsibilities.
Why are companies reducing management layers?
Several factors explain the rise of the great flattening. Cost reduction plays an important role, but it is only part of the story.
Reducing structural costs
As companies grow, management layers can accumulate over time. Several managers may end up monitoring the same indicators, attending the same meetings or approving the same decisions one after another.
In this type of organisation, the removal of middle management roles can reduce payroll costs without immediately cutting jobs directly linked to production, sales or customer service.
Companies tend to target positions whose responsibilities overlap with those of the level above or below. When a role adds little more than an extra approval stage, its long-term value may become harder to justify.
Simplifying decision-making
A highly vertical hierarchical structure can slow down the way a company operates. Requests move through several levels before being approved, then decisions travel back down to the teams concerned.
By reducing the number of intermediaries, companies aim to make communication more direct. Employees can reach decision-makers faster, while senior leaders receive less filtered information about operational problems.
However, faster decision-making also requires internal processes to change. Removing a management layer while keeping the same meetings, approval stages and procedures does not make much difference in practice.
Giving teams more decision-making power
The great flattening often comes with a desire to give employees more autonomy. Teams are encouraged to solve more problems without systematically asking a manager for approval.
This can make work more efficient, especially for experienced employees who understand their responsibilities well. It can also reduce certain forms of micromanagement.
However, a horizontal organisation still needs structure. Employees must know which decisions they are allowed to make, what targets they are expected to meet and when management involvement is still required. Without clear boundaries, autonomy can simply become an additional responsibility with little guidance.
Automating part of managerial work
Digital tools are increasingly taking over tasks that once involved several levels of management. They can track project progress, consolidate data, produce meeting notes or circulate information between departments.
The arrival of artificial intelligence is reinforcing this trend. The link between artificial intelligence and management becomes particularly clear when a manager’s role is mainly based on reporting, monitoring tasks and passing on instructions.
Automation does not remove the need for management altogether. It mainly reduces the value of roles centred on administrative tasks that can now be performed more quickly by software.
Which roles are most exposed?
The great flattening does not affect all managers in the same way.
The most vulnerable roles are often those whose contribution is difficult to distinguish. A manager who mainly compiles figures, passes on senior management instructions and approves tasks already checked elsewhere may be seen as a dispensable intermediary.
Positions located between two levels with very similar responsibilities are also exposed. A company may decide that a team leader and a director are enough, then redistribute the work previously handled by a department manager.
By contrast, managers with strong business expertise, who support employees, lead major transformations or handle sensitive situations, are much harder to replace.
The great flattening therefore pushes companies to question the real value of each management role. A job title alone does not protect a position. What matters is what that role contributes to the way the team operates.
Who takes over the work of eliminated managers?
This is one of the central issues in any organisational restructuring. The responsibilities attached to a role do not necessarily disappear when the role itself is removed.
Priorities still need to be set. New employees still need to be onboarded. Staff still need support, conflicts still need to be managed and problems still need to be escalated.
Some of this work can be simplified or automated. The rest must be taken over by someone else.
Managers who remain often take responsibility for larger teams. Experienced employees may take on coordination or training duties. Senior leaders may also become more involved in operational decisions.
This redistribution is not neutral. An employee may end up coordinating a project without receiving the title, time or pay that comes with the additional responsibility. A manager may have to support twice as many people without being given more resources.
A successful reorganisation therefore does more than remove a layer of management. It clearly defines who takes over each responsibility, with what resources and what recognition.
What benefits can the great flattening bring?
When it addresses a genuine organisational problem, the great flattening can make responsibilities clearer.
In some companies, several managers are involved in the same issue without anyone really knowing who makes the final decision. A shorter structure can reduce duplication and clarify roles.
Problems can also move upwards more quickly. Teams have more direct access to people who can make decisions, while senior leaders gain a less theoretical view of what is happening on the ground.
Collaboration between departments may also become easier. Sales, product and technical teams can work together without going through several levels of approval.
Finally, a flatter organisation can create different career paths. Employees may be able to progress through expertise or complex project management without automatically having to become a manager to take on more responsibility.
Can artificial intelligence replace a manager?
AI can automate part of managerial work, particularly repetitive tasks. It can analyse data, produce summaries, flag delays or organise schedules.
It can also help managers prepare meetings, track objectives or identify trends within a team.
Its limits become clear when a situation requires an understanding of context. Poor performance may be linked to a lack of training, excessive workload, conflicting objectives or tension within the team. Data can identify a gap, but it cannot always explain the full reason behind it.
Human support is also difficult to automate. Communicating a sensitive decision, rebuilding trust or helping an employee progress requires judgement, listening and a detailed understanding of the people involved.
The future of management is therefore unlikely to be about replacing people with technology. AI is more likely to absorb administrative tasks and leave managers more time for support, decision-making and skills development.
What role does the manager play in a flatter organisation?
In a less hierarchical company, managers can no longer justify their position solely through their authority to approve decisions.
Their value increasingly lies in their ability to provide direction, explain priorities and help teams solve complex problems. They need to set a clear framework without controlling every detail.
Business expertise also becomes more important. A manager who can genuinely support employees and understand their day-to-day constraints retains strong credibility.
The ability to use digital tools and AI will also become part of the role. Managers will need to know what can be automated and, just as importantly, recognise situations where human judgement remains essential.
The manager therefore becomes less of an intermediary between two hierarchical levels and more of a facilitator connecting strategy, daily work and the needs of the team.
What is the difference between great flattening and conscious unbossing?
The great flattening, great unbossing and conscious unbossing are often discussed together, but they do not describe exactly the same phenomenon.
The great flattening starts with the company. It reduces management layers and gives larger teams to the managers who remain.
Great unbossing focuses more specifically on reducing the number of managers or “bosses”. In practice, the term is often used as a synonym for the great flattening.
Conscious unbossing starts with employees. It describes the decision not to move into management, particularly when additional responsibilities do not appear to be matched by better pay, recognition or working conditions.
These trends can develop at the same time. Some companies are reducing the number of management roles while some employees are becoming less interested in taking those positions.
Is the great flattening coming to France?
The trend is mainly documented in the United States, particularly among large technology companies. However, it may also develop in France in less visible ways.
A company does not need to officially announce a great flattening strategy to flatten its organisation. It may simply decide not to replace a manager who leaves, merge two teams or give one manager responsibility for more employees.
It is still difficult to speak of a widespread disappearance of middle management in France. Employment practices, industries and company sizes vary significantly.
However, the search for productivity, the adoption of AI and the desire to simplify organisations are likely to encourage more employers to review their structures.
The success of the great flattening is not measured by the number of positions removed from an organisational chart. It depends above all on whether the company can preserve coordination, employee support and genuine opportunities for career progression.
Similar articles
Advice
What is the salary of a warehouse worker in 2025?
14 July 2026 · 2 min reading time
Find out everything about warehouse worker salaries in 2025: salary grid, bonuses, allowances, factors influencing pay progression, and tips for effective negotiation.
Advice
Workplace stress: what should you do when the pressure becomes too much?
03 June 2026 · 5 min reading time
Discover the signs of workplace stress, its causes, its consequences for health and the solutions to take action before professional exhaustion.
Advice
How is the reference salary calculated?
01 June 2026 · 4 min reading time
Reference Salary: Calculation and Impact on Your Rights. Severance pay, unemployment benefits, sick leave... Discover how it's calculated and what it means for you.
Become a temp worker with Staffmatch!
OUR MOBILE APPS
Download the temp worker app
Download the business appDownload our temp worker appDownload our business app
Download the temp worker appDownload the business appDownload our temp worker appDownload our business app