This might be a case of how not to flatten an organization's structure, but there is always heavy turnover during any restructuring. There is a key paradox of

This might be a case of how not to flatten an organization's structure, but there is always heavy turnover during any restructuring. There is a key paradox of implementing a "holacracy" in an existing organization. An organizational hierarchy is trying to force non-hierarchy on itself. A prerequisite for such rapid change seems to require an organization that can rapidly adapt to change. But part of the argument for flat organizations is creating adaptable businesses. I haven't read what problems prompted Zappos to push for these changes. Was an overly bureaucratic hierarchical culture holding a Zappos back from continued success? Is this admitting that something was wrong with their supposedly strong culture, but missing the actual problem? This seems part of a larger trend on insisting hires and workers should have an almost cult-like desire to be with their current employer. And leaders who obsessively manage their company's culture and its perception. People who don't buy into the whole result are treated as non-believers unfit to be part of their "mission".