A quiet but profound transformation is sweeping through Silicon Valley: the role of the middle manager is rapidly disappearing, Business Insider reports.
Tech giants like Microsoft, Amazon, Google, Intel, and Meta are flattening their organizational structures — a move aimed at increasing efficiency, cutting bureaucracy, and accelerating decision-making in a high-stakes, fast-paced industry.
The shift is not entirely new, but its intensity has surged. Reducing layers of management — often referred to as “flattening” — is being embraced across the sector. Microsoft recently laid off around 6,000 employees, many of them middle managers, to expand each remaining manager’s “span of control.” Intel, Amazon, and Dell have undertaken similar steps. Executives at these companies argue that fewer layers allow for quicker decisions and empower those closest to products and customers.
Amazon CEO Andy Jassy summed up the sentiment bluntly:
“I hate bureaucracy.”
The push to flatten is partly driven by external pressure. Startups like OpenAI and Anthropic are innovating at a blistering pace, enabled by their lean structures and fast decision-making. In a business environment increasingly shaped by artificial intelligence, speed is paramount — and traditional hierarchies are seen as a drag.
Management experts say flattening can make companies more agile and adaptable. MIT professor Deborah Ancona notes that with fewer layers, frontline employees are more empowered to act, potentially fueling innovation and responsiveness.
“We hire highly educated, trained people, and then we put them in these environments with rules and procedures and eight layers of hierarchy,” said Bayer CEO Bill Anderson, who has cut thousands of managerial roles. “Then we wonder why big companies are so lame most of the time.”
However, flattening is not without risk. More employees per manager can mean less individual attention, reduced mentoring, and increased administrative burdens. At Amazon Web Services, some employees report spending more time tracking work progress and attending meetings as they juggle more direct reports and broader responsibilities.
Former Amazon HR leader Yvonne Lee-Hawkins recounted managing up to 21 direct reports — nearly double her previous load — which made it difficult to hold regular one-on-one meetings and support her team effectively.
Experts like Ravin Jesuthasan at Mercer say having 20 or more direct reports is likely “really hard” for most managers. While some individuals — such as Nvidia’s Jensen Huang, who reportedly manages 60 people — thrive in these conditions, most organizations need to carefully balance efficiency with employee support and leadership development.
Gallup research suggests that managerial quality, more than team size, influences employee engagement and performance. Yet too few managers with too many reports can leave high performers unsupported and emerging talent overlooked.
McKinsey has found that strong managers can significantly boost shareholder returns, highlighting the strategic value of leadership talent — even in a flatter structure.
The risk, says Korn Ferry’s Jane Edison Stevenson, is that companies focused only on trimming hierarchy might fail to cultivate leaders with the cross-functional insight needed for long-term success.
“At some point,” she notes, “you’ve got to start to make a bet on the leaders that are going to build muscle across, not just vertically.”
