We Spend Too Much Time Reorganizing. Not Enough Time Redesigning Work

One thing I've noticed over the years is how often organizations respond to change by changing the organization chart.

The business grows, priorities shift, a new leader joins, costs need to come down, or teams aren't working as expected. Before long, someone starts moving functions, changing reporting lines, or creating a new structure.

Sometimes those changes are necessary.

But I've also seen organizations go through several reorganizations without solving the problem they were trying to address in the first place.

The reason is usually simple.

Changing who reports to whom doesn't necessarily change how work gets done.

That's the conversation I think we don't have often enough.

Before discussing reporting lines, spans of control, or where a team should sit, I think we should spend more time understanding the work itself. What are we trying to achieve? How has the business changed? Which capabilities have become more important? Where are decisions slowing down? Where do teams depend too much on one another? Where are responsibilities overlapping?

Those questions tend to reveal much more than an organization chart ever will.

I've worked on projects that involved workforce planning, job architecture, process redesign, HR technology, and organization design. Looking back, they all had something in common. None of them were really about the structure. They were about helping the organization work better.

Sometimes the answer was creating a new role. Sometimes it was removing one. Sometimes it meant clarifying ownership because too many teams were doing similar work. Other times, the structure barely changed at all. What changed was how decisions were made or how work moved across teams.

That's why I've become cautious whenever a reorganization is presented as the solution.

An organization chart is a representation of the business. It isn't the business itself.

If work hasn't changed, if decision-making hasn't improved, or if accountability is still unclear, a new structure rarely creates a different outcome. It simply gives the same problems a different shape.

I also think technology is forcing us to revisit this conversation.

AI, automation, and digital tools are changing the nature of work much faster than they are changing organizational structures. Some activities require fewer people than they did a few years ago. Others require entirely new capabilities. Teams collaborate differently, information moves faster, and some decisions can now be made much closer to where the work happens.

That doesn't automatically mean organizations need another reorganization.

It does mean they should rethink how work is designed.

For me, that's what organization design has always been about.

Not drawing better organization charts.

Understanding how work creates value and making sure the organization helps people deliver it.