The Great Unbossing: How a Flat Hierarchy Killed Middle Management at 4 Companies

Everyone says managers are essential. Gallup’s research shows why that argument still carries weight. Managers account for 70% of the variance in team engagement, and Gallup’s global dataset now covers tens of millions of employees which is not to be sniffed at. Yet Gallup also reports that only 22% of managers are engaged themselves. That is the tension at the centre of the current debate about the flat hierarchy model. Companies still need leadership, employees still need a manager, but many are questioning whether they need so many layers of management.

A flat hierarchy removes reporting layers and pushes decisions closer to the people doing the work. Recent data shows how fast the structure is changing. The average span of control for managers rose from 10.9 in 2024 to 12.1 in 2025, according to Gallup research. This represents a 50% increase in team size over the last decade. As companies lean into AI and autonomous workflows, the case for multiple approval layers looks weaker.

Four companies now offer useful test cases. Cars24 removed titles altogether. Clever built a business with self-managed teams and zero bosses. Citi cut management layers at scale inside a global bank. Haier has spent 20 years proving that a flatter model can last.

1. Cars24: Flatland in Practice

In July 2026, India-based marketplace Cars24 scrapped all job titles, grades and bands across its 6,000-person workforce. One designation replaced the lot: Builder.

This was not a branding exercise. Cars24 spent 18 months redesigning its operating model before it made the switch. Co-founder Vikram Chopra framed the move as a response to a world where information no longer needs to travel up and down a chain of command before anyone can act.

The commercial result was sharp. Cars24 reported a 50% year-on-year increase in revenue per employee in H2 FY2026 and an EBITDA margin improvement of roughly 300 basis points. The point is straightforward: the company removed signals of rank and pushed authority closer to the work.

2. Clever: Self-Managed Teams at Scale

Danish EV charging company Clever runs with roughly 500 employees and zero bosses. Clever runs a flat hierarchy where teams manage themselves. The business organises itself through more than 50 self-managed teams, each with around 8 to 12 people.

These teams handle recruitment, people decisions and day-to-day execution without a traditional manager sitting above them. That design gives employees more direct ownership over results and removes a layer of approval from routine decisions. It also shows how a flat hierarchy can support speed without losing focus.

The model has not held back growth. Euronews reported that Clever delivered 66% revenue growth in 2025, while 92% of employees said they were glad to head to work. For HR leaders, that matters because it links structure, autonomy and employee engagement to hard commercial performance.

3. Citi: Fewer Layers, Faster Decisions

Jane Fraser’s turnaround at Citi included a direct attack on complexity. She cut management layers from 13 to 8 and eliminated more than 60 internal committees. Citi’s version of a flat hierarchy proved that layer reduction works even in regulated industries.

That matters because Citi is the opposite of a start-up test case. This is a global bank with heavy regulation, legacy systems and years of organisational design drag. If flatter structures can work here, the argument carries far more weight. In this case, the flat hierarchy approach created faster decisions without removing control.

The early returns are strong. Fortune reported that Citi posted its highest quarterly revenue in a decade, with all five divisions reporting gains. The stock has risen about 80% since Fraser took over. The lesson is clear: cutting layers can improve speed and accountability even inside a highly complex enterprise.

4. Haier: 20 Years of Proof

Haier started this experiment long before “unbossing” became a management trend. Haier’s flat hierarchy model, Rendanheyi, launched in 2005 and reshaped the company around small, market-facing micro-enterprises instead of a conventional hierarchy.

The scale is hard to ignore. Research from Wharton and Copenhagen Business School links the model to the elimination of roughly 10,000 middle management positions, a 23% annual growth rate since 2012, and the creation of 1.6 million ecosystem jobs. Haier is now the world’s largest white goods manufacturer. Few examples of flat hierarchy change can match that scale.

What makes Haier important is durability. Plenty of companies flatten a structure for a year or two. Haier has kept this flat hierarchy model running for two decades, which makes it one of the clearest long-term tests of decentralised authority in a large enterprise.

What a Flat Hierarchy Actually Means for HR Leaders

The flat hierarchy trend is not anti-management. It is anti-bad-structure.

Across Cars24, Clever, Citi and Haier, the common thread is the same. Authority comes from execution and impact, not position. These companies did not remove leadership. They reduced unnecessary layers, clarified ownership and pushed decisions closer to the work. A flat hierarchy works when teams have clear information, visible standards and direct accountability.

The flat hierarchy trend is not anti-management.

HR leaders should take three practical lessons from these cases:

• Flattening without redesigning culture fails: Cutting layers on an org chart does nothing on its own. Teams need clear decision rights, stronger communication norms and better support systems.
• Data transparency is a prerequisite: People can only act without constant manager oversight if they can see the same metrics, priorities and performance signals.
• Peer accountability replaces manager control: In flatter systems, colleagues hold each other to standards. That demands better feedback loops, sharper role clarity and a stronger discipline around delivery.

Review your management layers and test whether they speed up decisions or slow them down. Then redesign the structure around accountability, data and execution so your flat hierarchy supports better decisions at every level.