I can't actually answer this question. Why?
Because this question actually presupposes the three premise that flattening is right, hierarchical is wrong, and Google is not hierarchical management.
Can flattening be right? Does Google have no hierarchy?
I particularly disagree with this premise. I think flattening is never right, it is only effective in a particular scenario.
In 2002, Larry and Page began to Latest Mailing Database implement a flat organization experiment at Google: abolishing engineer manager positions and creating a corporate environment similar to a university atmosphere, hoping to eliminate hierarchical barriers and enhance employee creativity.
But as soon as the experiment started, Larry and Page regretted it—
A large number of employees came to report on the trivial matters of Sesame, from project expenses to personal conflicts, which made a mess.
So this daring "unmanaged" experiment failed immediately.
For a company as big as Google, because of the limited management range, it must implement hierarchical management, and discard the seemingly simple flat management. Only in this way can the efficiency of the entire company be improved.
Complexity is the price of maturity.
In fact, in addition to flat management, when it comes to Google, you have to mention OKR.
This was formulated by Intel Corporation and introduced to Google by investor John-Doerr less than a year after Google was founded, and has been using the management by objectives method to this day.
OKR is Objectives and Key Results. Simply put, it is translated into its own key results based on the Objectives of the previous level; the next level regards the key results of the previous level as his Objectives, and then lists its own key results. Then go down, and then go to the next level to list the previous level, and regard the key results of the previous level as your own Objectives.
To put it more simply, Google is to decompose the big goals of the upper level into small goals of the next level, and then the next level of the next level decomposes the small goals into small goals.
This is Google's own OKR, and many details will not be repeated here.
But we have already heard from its logic that Google is of course hierarchical. If it is not hierarchical, there is no way for the next level to undertake the key results of the previous level.
What stage does flat management apply to?
An enterprise generally goes through three stages in the development process: start-up stage, maturity stage and transformation stage.
Management is relatively simple when starting a business. Because there are not many people, you can basically communicate with a lot of things by shouting, and it will be solved by having a great hot pot.
That's when you found out that a lot of people especially believe in one thing called management without management.
At this stage, this management approach certainly holds.
Because communication is very chaotic, but the communication cost is not high, at this time everyone's energy is spent on business.
At the beginning of the business, there is no management cost, but after 10 people, after 100 people, the management cost does not increase by 100 times, but increases by 10,000 times.
Only at this time will many companies realize that the so-called hierarchical management and reporting at every level is a very necessary means.
The so-called flat management is not a golden rule, nor is it absolutely correct, it is only effective in a certain special scenario.
Many successful entrepreneurs said in interviews that the most memorable and happiest time was the beginning of their business, when brothers rolled up their sleeves and worked hard together, drinking in big bowls and eating meat.
Many employees who have experienced the company from small to large will also complain that they can't talk to their boss for a month, let alone eat hot pot together.