The company organisation chart: why drawing it is not enough

Sooner or later, almost every company decides to ‘create an org chart’. Names are gathered, boxes are drawn, lines are connected, and the result is shared with satisfaction. A few weeks later, the document is either already obsolete or, while accurate, is unused. This is not because it is poorly made, but because it answers a different question from the one the company truly needed to ask.

Boxes and reporting lines do not show who decides

A traditional organisation chart describes two things: existing positions and hierarchical reporting lines. This information is useful, but it omits what causes the most friction in practice. Who approves spending above a certain threshold? Who sets priorities when two departments request the same resource? Who has the authority to say no to a client?

In many organisations, the real answer does not align with the chart. A department head formally leads the team, but every hire must be approved by the owner. An individual in a mid-level position is the de facto point of contact for all exceptions, being the only one who knows every client's history. The organisation chart is not false; it is incomplete.

The unseen organisational power

Some forms of influence are never represented on a chart: accumulated knowledge, a direct relationship with the owner, control over critical information. As a company grows, these factors become as important as hierarchical lines and often explain why certain decisions stall. This is a typical sign of companies that are overly dependent on their founder or a few long-serving individuals.

Ignoring this dimension leads to reorganisations that move boxes without reallocating decision-making authority. The new manager arrives, finds their name in the right place, and discovers that questions are still being directed elsewhere.

How to turn the organisation chart into a tool

A more useful approach begins with a few recurring, important decisions—ten at most—and clarifies for each one who decides, who contributes, and who must be informed. Once this exercise is complete, drawing the organisation chart becomes almost a formality: the reporting lines reflect responsibilities, not habits.

The next step is to link each box to a concise role description. A lengthy document is not necessary; the position's purpose, main responsibilities, and level of autonomy are sufficient. This is the point where the organisation chart and job descriptions begin to align, and where it becomes possible to distinguish between different levels of the same role, such as the differences between junior and senior profiles.

A document that must be maintained

Finally, the organisation chart should be treated as a living document. Every time a position is opened, an employee is promoted, or a responsibility is shifted, it is an opportunity to check whether the chart still reflects reality. The companies where it works are those that update it in line with decisions, not those that redraw it from scratch every two years.

If the organisation chart remains a static snapshot, the question to ask is not how to draw it better, but which decisions currently have no home in any box.

The chart is therefore one step in a wider piece of work. Our guide on roles, processes and responsibilities in a growing company connects decision-making to interpersonal dynamics and their implications for the employment relationship.