3 ms·

counter-point -- olark (a ycombinator company) uses flat-ish hierarchy and works quite well https://blog.olark.com/our-world-is-no-longer-flat https://blog.olar

• fingerprinter 11y ago
  This isn't a real counter-point, imo. This basically says "flat didn't scale, so we introduced some structure or other workarounds, though 'teams' can stay flat". That basically is called hierarchy by a different term. And I suspect, as most with quite a bit of experience would, that as olark grows, more layers (aka, hierarchy) would be introduced. It's natural and it's fine. It's fine! I know it's a dirty word, but hierarchy is fine. It really is. I contend it's NOT the problem that people want to solve, rather they want to solve a different one. It's the classic case of treating the symptoms and not the disease. I highly suspect that in most flat companies, the real thing people are after is some subset of [trust, autonomy, mission, vision, ownership, accountability, flexibility, empowerment] etc. But, instead of focusing on those, the focus shifts to the structure. If in solving for the subset it is found that structure is at fault, by all means give it a go. That is not how I've seen it done, though. Rather, people /assume/ flat is better with no mindfully explicit reasons why they would adopt it.