Let me count the ways - but for now a short primer ….
Wrong - In What They Are
-
A static snapshot in a dynamic system - Org charts freeze people in place, in a world that’s fluid, adaptive, and always in motion.
-
An illusion of control - They suggest neat lines of authority, when actual influence flows in networks, whispers, and Slack threads.
-
A power fantasy - Designed more to reassure executives than to reflect how things really work on the ground.
Wrong - In How They Are
-
Too hierarchical, too linear - Most charts resemble military command structures in an age that demands collaboration and cross-functionality.
-
Built top-down, not inside-out - They reflect formal reporting lines, not value creation, lived relationships, or trust pathways.
-
Exclusionary by design - Contractors, advisors, ecosystem partners, AI tools? Nowhere to be seen, yet often critical to delivery.
Wrong - In the Information They Contain
-
Titles ≠ capability - Job labels are vague proxies. They reveal little about what someone is great at, trusted for, or actually doing.
-
Missing the real flows - No view of how decisions are made, who connects teams, or where knowledge is hoarded vs. shared.
-
Performance blind - They say nothing about value contribution, outcomes, energy, or momentum.
Wrong - In How Work Is Understood
-
They reduce people to boxes - And forget that work is a web of conversations, motivations, tensions, experiments, and progress.
-
Ignore emergence and adaptability - Real work happens across silos, shaped by informal leaders, not always those in bold font.
-
Reinforce outdated logic - Built for predictability and scale, when today’s work is about learning, iterating, and adjusting on the fly.