Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Organizational chart

An organizational chart, also known as an org chart, is a that visually represents the of an organization, illustrating the interrelationships among positions, roles, reporting lines, and levels of authority. It provides a clear overview of hierarchies, responsibilities, and communication flows within a or , often using boxes connected by lines to depict superior-subordinate relationships. The concept of the organizational chart originated in the mid-19th century, with the first known example created by Scottish-American engineer Daniel McCallum in 1855 for the New York and Erie Railroad, where it mapped out the chain of command to manage the growing complexity of rail operations. This innovation evolved through the contributions of management pioneers such as Frederick Taylor, , and , who emphasized bureaucracy, chain of command, and work specialization in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. By the early 20th century, organizational charts became standard tools in business administration, appearing in government agencies like the U.S. State Department by 1909 and in corporations to formalize structures amid industrialization. Organizational charts serve critical functions in modern businesses by clarifying employee responsibilities, facilitating , and promoting efficient coordination across departments. They help bind members together through defined guidelines and support as organizations grow, though they must adapt to informal linkages like team collaborations that influence actual operations. Common types include hierarchical charts, which emphasize top-down authority; flat structures for agile, low-level ; functional charts grouped by expertise; divisional charts for product or geographic segments; and charts blending multiple lines for complex projects. In sectors like healthcare and , these charts support operational efficiency, while digital tools enable dynamic, interactive versions beyond static diagrams.

Fundamentals

Definition

An organizational chart is a graphical that visually represents the structure of an , illustrating its , roles, reporting lines, and interrelationships between positions or departments. This tool provides a clear depiction of how authority flows within the entity, from top-level executives to lower-level employees, enabling stakeholders to understand the formal arrangement of personnel and units. The primary components of an organizational chart include boxes or nodes that symbolize individual positions, roles, or departments, connected by lines or arrows to denote reporting relationships and chains of command. These elements are typically labeled with details such as job titles, departmental affiliations, and in some cases, employee names or contact information to enhance clarity and accessibility. Variations in design may incorporate colors or shapes to differentiate levels or functions, but the core focus remains on structural visualization rather than operational details. Terminology for this diagram includes synonyms such as organigram or organogram, which emphasize its diagrammatic nature derived from "organization" and "diagram." In project management, it may be referred to as an organizational breakdown structure (OBS), a hierarchical depiction linking organizational units to project work packages. Importantly, an organizational chart differs from a process flowchart, which maps sequential workflows and decision points rather than static hierarchies, and from a network diagram, which often highlights interconnected nodes in technical or informal systems without emphasizing formal authority lines.

Purpose and Benefits

Organizational charts serve as essential tools for defining reporting relationships within an , illustrating who reports to whom and establishing clear lines of . This structure helps delineate the , ensuring that employees understand their relative to others and the flow of directives from . By visually mapping these connections, org charts prevent misunderstandings about and streamline the of tasks. In addition to outlining reporting lines, organizational charts clarify roles and responsibilities, specifying individual and departmental functions to minimize overlap or gaps in duties. This clarity fosters a shared understanding of expectations, allowing teams to focus on core objectives without constant clarification. Furthermore, they facilitate communication by providing a reference for identifying key contacts and decision pathways, promoting more effective interactions across levels. Org charts also aid in by highlighting figures and approval processes, enabling quicker resolutions to issues and reducing bottlenecks. They support for new employees by offering an immediate overview of the organization's layout, helping newcomers integrate faster and grasp their place within the broader structure. underscores how such visual aids contribute to structured . Among the key benefits, organizational charts improve by reducing confusion over , which in turn lowers the incidence of role ambiguity and associated errors. This leads to smoother operations, as employees spend less time navigating uncertainties and more on productive work. In large organizations, they enhance by making the accessible, building and among staff. Additionally, org charts assist in by revealing team compositions and capacities, allowing leaders to distribute workloads and assets more equitably. They function as tools for , enabling visualization of current setups against growth goals and identifying needs for . Empirical analyses from organizational indicate that optimizing structures via org charts can reduce managerial layers and costs by 10-15%, further boosting overall . In , org charts align closely with foundational concepts such as —the number of direct reports per manager—and chain of command—the sequential authority pathway. By depicting these elements, charts help balance managerial oversight with , preventing overload while maintaining coordination. This integration supports theoretical models of effective , where clear visualizations promote adaptive and resilient structures.

History

Origins in the 19th Century

The rapid expansion of industries during the 19th-century Industrial Revolution necessitated new methods for visualizing and managing complex hierarchies, as organizations grew to accommodate thousands of workers across vast operations. Railroads, in particular, exemplified this challenge, spanning hundreds of miles and requiring coordinated oversight amid technological advances like the telegraph, which generated unprecedented volumes of operational data. This context drove the development of tools to clarify reporting lines and responsibilities, enabling efficient decision-making in an era of unprecedented organizational scale. The organizational chart originated in 1855 when Daniel McCallum, general superintendent of the New York and —one of the longest rail lines in the world at nearly (approximately 495 miles)—created a tree-like to address these complexities. McCallum, a Scottish-born engineer, designed the chart to decentralize authority while ensuring clear lines of communication, with the at the roots, executive officers forming the trunk, and divisional superintendents as branches extending to operational units. This structure allowed for rapid response to issues like delays or accidents by empowering local leaders with real-time information via telegraph. McCallum's diagram stands as the first printed example of an organizational chart, published in the company's 1855 , where it illustrated the superintendent's oversight of six operating divisions, mechanical departments, and support functions. Lines in the diagram represented direct reporting relationships, providing a visual blueprint for in a exceeding 4,000 employees. This innovation marked a shift from informal to formalized , adapting hierarchical principles long used in contexts—such as those developed by the U.S. Department of for large-scale operations—to industrial needs.

20th-Century Developments and Standardization

In the early 20th century, organizational charts were popularized by management pioneers and , who integrated them into foundational principles of scientific and administrative . Taylor's (1911) advocated for systematic task division and efficiency, relying on hierarchical diagrams to map worker responsibilities and supervisory lines in industrial settings. Similarly, Fayol's General and Industrial Management (1916) emphasized scalar chains of authority and unity of command, using charts to visualize top-down structures that ensured coordinated operations across departments. These contributions shifted organizational charts from tools to essential components of modern theory, promoting clarity in large-scale enterprises. A key milestone occurred in the 1910s with their application at , where charts supported oversight of the innovative moving introduced in 1913. By November 1919, Ford issued a detailed organizational chart depicting a formal chain of command from president through officers, superintendents, managers, and department heads, facilitating the coordination of complex production processes amid rapid expansion. This practical use exemplified how charts enabled real-time supervision and in high-volume , influencing broader industrial adoption. Post-World War II, organizational charts achieved widespread standardization in corporations, drawing from military hierarchies that prioritized clear command structures for efficiency. The era's and influx of veterans familiar with such systems accelerated their integration into business practices, as seen in the 1949 reorganization of the U.S. Department of Defense, which modeled scalable frameworks later adapted by private firms. By the 1950s, they appeared routinely in management textbooks as standard tools for , with Peter Drucker's The Practice of Management (1954) highlighting their role in defining roles and responsibilities to drive organizational performance. As corporations faced accelerating changes like mergers in the mid- to late , recognition grew for the limitations of static charts, prompting a shift toward dynamic representations that could accommodate evolving structures. Larry Greiner's 1972 model of organizational described phases of and , including coordination challenges during and , underscoring the need for adaptable charts to reflect post-merger integrations without disrupting operations. This perspective laid groundwork for later computational approaches, though manual revisions remained dominant until advanced software emerged.

Types

Hierarchical Org Charts

Hierarchical organizational charts represent the traditional top-down structure, often visualized as a with the (CEO) or equivalent at the apex, branching downward through successive levels of to entry-level positions. This design establishes clear vertical reporting lines, where each employee reports to a single superior, facilitating a straightforward flow of authority and instructions from higher to lower tiers. Key characteristics of this structure include a strong emphasis on , which is centralized at the top and delegated downward, ensuring defined chains of command. The —typically ranging from 5 to 7 direct reports per manager—helps maintain oversight without overwhelming supervisors, though this can vary by organizational level and complexity. Departmental often emerge, as functions are grouped into specialized units like or operations, promoting focused expertise but potentially limiting cross-functional . In stable environments, hierarchical org charts offer advantages such as streamlined , where enables quick resolutions without diffuse consultations, and enhanced , as roles and responsibilities are explicitly delineated for performance tracking. These traits support efficient coordination in predictable settings, reducing ambiguity in operations. This structure is prevalent in large corporations and military organizations, where regimentation and scale demand rigid oversight; for instance, a typical company layout features a C-suite of executives (e.g., CEO, ) overseeing vice presidents, who in turn manage departmental directors and staff.

Matrix and Functional Org Charts

Functional organizational charts structure employees by grouping them into departments based on specialized skills and similar tasks, such as , , , and operations. This arrangement emphasizes expertise within each function, with horizontal lines connecting team members to their departmental leaders and vertical lines linking those leaders to higher executives, thereby maintaining a clear chain of command while promoting efficiency in specialized work. Such charts are particularly suited to stable environments where deep functional knowledge drives operations, allowing for streamlined within silos. Matrix organizational charts, in contrast, introduce dual relationships to foster cross-functional , overlaying project-based lines on traditional functional hierarchies. Employees report to both a —via solid lines indicating primary authority for day-to-day expertise and —and a or —often via dotted lines signifying secondary or collaborative oversight—creating a grid-like that balances with . This design addresses the rigidity of pure hierarchical models by enabling resource sharing and rapid adaptation to demands, though it requires careful to avoid confusion. Both functional and matrix charts are prevalent in dynamic sectors like and consulting, where functional charts support ongoing in areas such as or financial advisory, while charts enhance on client projects or initiatives. By incorporating cross-functional elements, structures particularly mitigate hierarchical limitations, promoting flexibility and a holistic view of organizational goals through multidisciplinary teams. A notable example is NASA's application in programs like Apollo and the , where engineers reported to both functional department heads for technical expertise and mission leads for project delivery, ensuring coordinated efforts across complex endeavors.

Flat and Divisional Org Charts

A flat organizational chart features minimal layers of management, often eliminating entirely to create a broad, horizontal structure. This design typically involves wide spans of control, where individual managers or leaders oversee a large number of direct reports, such as 20 or more employees, enabling streamlined operations without intermediate oversight. Such charts promote by fostering direct communication between employees and top , reducing bureaucratic delays and encouraging employee autonomy in decision-making. Flat structures are particularly suited to startups and smaller organizations where rapid and flexibility are essential, as they elevate individual responsibility and enhance coordination across teams. However, challenges arise in scaling, including potential role ambiguity and difficulties in maintaining consistent oversight as the organization grows. A prominent example is , which operates without a traditional , allowing employees to self-organize into projects based on interest and expertise, thereby supporting creative output in game development. In contrast, a divisional organizational chart divides the company into semi-autonomous units based on product lines, geographic regions, types, or markets, with each maintaining its own functional , resources, and . This structure allows divisions to operate independently, tailoring strategies to specific needs while aligning under a central corporate oversight for shared policies. Divisional charts are ideal for large conglomerates facing diverse markets, as they enable focused management of varied business segments without overwhelming a single centralized . Key characteristics include duplicated functions across divisions, such as separate sales or R&D teams, which can drive specialization but also introduce challenges in cross-unit coordination, potentially leading to silos and inefficiencies in resource sharing. Similarly, Procter & Gamble (P&G) uses a product-based divisional setup, segmenting into business units for categories like Beauty, Grooming, and Fabric & Home Care, allowing targeted innovation within each area.

Creation Methods

Manual and Traditional Approaches

Manual and traditional approaches to creating organizational charts rely on non-digital, hands-on techniques that have been employed since the mid-19th century. These methods typically involve hand-drawn sketches on paper, the use of stencils for uniform boxes and connecting lines, or larger formats like flip charts for group collaboration. The earliest known organizational chart, developed for the and in 1855, was hand-drawn by George Holt Henshaw under the direction of Daniel McCallum to visualize the company's hierarchical structure and delegate responsibilities efficiently. Such approaches dominated organizational visualization before the widespread adoption of personal computers in the 1980s, serving as the primary means for mapping hierarchies in businesses, , and other institutions. The process begins with gathering employee data, including roles, reporting lines, and departmental affiliations, often compiled from personnel or interviews. Next, creators sketch the overall starting from top-level positions, using on to boxes for individuals or groups and lines to indicate relationships. Stencils—plastic or metal templates with pre-cut shapes—ensure consistency in drawing rectangular boxes for roles and arrows or lines for connections, reducing errors in alignment and proportion. Roles are then labeled with names, titles, and sometimes brief descriptions of responsibilities. The draft undergoes review for accuracy, involving feedback from managers or to verify structures and resolve discrepancies. Finally, the completed chart is distributed as printed copies, photocopies, or even hand-traced duplicates for sharing across the . These methods remain relevant today in small teams, low-tech environments, or during initial brainstorming sessions, such as sketches on s to quickly map ad-hoc project structures. For instance, a startup might use a large during a meeting to draw a simple , allowing real-time adjustments without software. Their advantages include low cost, accessibility with basic materials like and , and the tactile nature that fosters collaborative input. However, they are labor-intensive, particularly for updates following personnel changes, which require redrawing or erasing elements, often leading to outdated charts and errors in complex organizations.

Digital Tools and Software

Digital tools and software for creating organizational charts have evolved to provide scalable, automated solutions that integrate with information systems (HRIS), enabling efficient visualization of complex structures. Popular options include , which supports data-driven diagramming from sources like Excel or ; , a cloud-based platform for collaborative chart building; OrgChart Now, specialized software for automated workforce planning; and HR systems such as Workday and , which offer built-in or integrated charting capabilities. Key features of these tools emphasize and , including auto-generation of charts from employee databases to reduce manual input, drag-and-drop interfaces for intuitive editing, seamless with HRIS for real-time synchronization of personnel changes, and export options to formats like PDF or PowerPoint for easy distribution. For instance, Workday's organization management module allows modeling of business changes with data-linked visuals, while provides direct access to hierarchical views from its employee directory. The process of creating an organizational chart digitally typically involves several streamlined steps: importing data from sources such as files containing roles, names, and reporting lines; selecting a suited to the structure, like hierarchical or layouts; customizing visuals through color-coding, annotations, or conditional formatting; and the output via secure cloud links for team access. These steps leverage the tools' automation to handle large datasets, contrasting with earlier manual methods by minimizing errors and time. As of 2025, emerging trends in organizational chart software incorporate (AI) for enhanced functionality, such as auto-suggesting optimal spans of control based on and generating layouts from textual descriptions of structures. Mobile applications for remote updates further support dynamic environments, allowing on-the-go modifications synced across devices. Tools like Miro's Org Chart exemplify this by instantly transforming descriptions into visual hierarchies, while advanced platforms use for pattern detection and to optimize designs.

Applications

In Business and Corporate Settings

In business and corporate settings, organizational charts serve as critical tools for restructuring during , enabling companies to map overlaps, optimize lines, and integrated future-state structures that align with strategic objectives such as market expansion or acquisition. For instance, in a $40 billion acquisition by a client, organizational mapping facilitated staffing analysis and talent selection to minimize redundancies and retain key personnel, ultimately accelerating post-merger integration. These charts also support performance reviews by clearly delineating roles and responsibilities, allowing managers to evaluate individual contributions against defined expectations and departmental goals within the broader hierarchy. Additionally, they aid talent mapping for by visualizing current capabilities, identifying high-potential employees, and highlighting skill gaps to ensure continuity in roles. Tech firms like exemplify the use of organizational charts to foster cross-functional project teams, where employees report to both functional leaders (e.g., ) and product managers, enhancing and rapid innovation in dynamic environments. In contrast, retail chains often employ divisional charts structured by or product line, enabling localized decision-making on and to adapt to diverse market demands while maintaining centralized oversight. Organizational charts significantly impact corporate by aligning with business goals, such as flattening hierarchies in startups to promote and employee , which boosts and faster to competitive pressures. This approach, as seen in early-stage tech ventures, reduces bureaucratic layers to empower teams with direct access to key performance indicators, ensuring decisions support revenue growth and innovation objectives. A notable is 's organizational redesign in the 1990s under CEO , who restructured the company by consolidating divisions into larger business units and forming a corporate executive committee to streamline , facilitating a pivotal shift from hardware to services and software. This transformation, initiated amid cumulative losses of approximately $13 billion in 1992 and 1993, emphasized customer-focused services like Global Services, which helped regain market leadership by 2002 through improved operational efficiency and strategic realignment.

In Government, Non-Profits, and Other Sectors

In government sectors, organizational charts predominantly adopt hierarchical structures to delineate legal and administrative hierarchies, ensuring clear chains of command that align with constitutional and statutory requirements. For instance, the U.S. federal government utilizes such charts to outline the executive branch, where the appoints 15 Cabinet secretaries to head departments like , , and , each overseeing sub-agencies and staff to facilitate policy implementation and inter-agency coordination. These charts promote by visualizing decision-making processes and accountability lines, allowing public oversight and compliance with laws such as the Freedom of Information Act, while also aiding internal to prevent overlaps in authority. Non-profit organizations often employ flat or functional organizational charts to emphasize alignment and collaborative operations, distinguishing them from profit-driven entities by highlighting volunteer integration and . In a flat , and volunteers report directly to an or board, fostering agility in resource-limited environments, while functional charts group roles into areas like programs, , and to ensure activities support the core , such as or . is central, with charts illustrating how directors provide strategic direction and responsibility, often as volunteers themselves, to maintain ethical standards. These visualizations aid donor reporting by clarifying how contributions fund specific roles and initiatives, enhancing trust and demonstrating impact through transparent hierarchies that tie operations back to the organization's charitable objectives. In other sectors like the and , organizational charts serve specialized functions, such as chain-of-command diagrams in the military to enforce and rapid response. The U.S. Army's structure, for example, features a hierarchical chart with the Department of the Army at the apex, branching into four Army Commands (e.g., Futures Command for ), ten for regional operations, and fourteen Direct Reporting Units like the U.S. Military Academy, ensuring operational efficiency across active, reserve, and components. Similarly, educational institutions use tree-like department charts to map academic and administrative divisions; universities typically position the president at the top, followed by vice presidents for areas like academic affairs, then deans overseeing schools (e.g., or ) and faculty departments, which supports and academic . The exemplifies global divisions in its system chart, depicting principal organs like the General Assembly and Security Council alongside specialized agencies (e.g., WHO, ) and programs, illustrating functional interconnections for international coordination without a strict national hierarchy.

Limitations

Inherent Structural Constraints

Organizational charts, by design, provide a static of an organization's formal , but they inherently overlook the fluid informal that underpin much of the actual work and communication within companies. These , which include unofficial alliances and advice-seeking relationships, often determine real power dynamics and far more than the official lines of depicted. As a result, charts fail to capture cultural influences or emergent collaborations that shape , leading to an incomplete view of how decisions are truly made and executed. This static representation contributes to an oversimplification of complex interpersonal and interdepartmental relationships, reducing multifaceted interactions to mere boxes and connecting lines. For instance, cross-departmental collaborations or ad-hoc teams essential for are not visualized, potentially misleading managers about the scope of actual and coordination. Such diagrammatic constraints can foster misconceptions about flows, emphasizing rigid lines over the nuanced realities of organizational life. Scalability poses another built-in limitation, particularly in large organizations employing thousands of individuals, where charts quickly become visually cluttered and overwhelming due to the sheer volume of elements. The rigid hierarchical format exacerbates this by struggling to accommodate non-traditional arrangements, such as agile teams that operate outside strict vertical chains, thereby limiting the tool's utility in depicting modern, adaptive structures. From a theoretical perspective, scholars like have argued that organizational charts reinforce bureaucratic tendencies, as exemplified in machine bureaucracies that rely on standardized processes and multiple layers of control, ultimately sacrificing flexibility for predictability. Mintzberg contrasts this with more organic forms like adhocracies, which prioritize adaptability but are poorly suited to traditional chart representations, highlighting how such diagrams can inadvertently promote inflexible structures ill-equipped for turbulent environments.

Practical and Maintenance Challenges

Maintaining organizational charts presents significant operational challenges, primarily due to their tendency to become outdated rapidly in dynamic environments. Personnel changes such as hires, promotions, resignations, and terminations occur frequently, rendering charts obsolete if not updated promptly, which can misrepresent lines and structures. In fast-paced or growing organizations, this necessitates regular reviews—often quarterly—to ensure ongoing relevance, as delays can disrupt communication and decision-making. Moreover, employees frequently resist updates to organizational charts, viewing them as indicators of broader structural shifts that threaten or , leading to reduced and slower adoption. The resource demands for accurate chart maintenance are substantial, requiring dedicated time, specialized expertise, and coordination efforts that escalate in global organizations with remote and distributed workforces. Compiling and verifying data across multiple locations, time zones, and systems demands cross-functional , often straining and IT teams without automated support. In multinational settings, these challenges intensify due to varying local regulations and cultural differences in reporting, potentially leading to incomplete or inconsistent representations if resources are insufficient. Privacy and security concerns further complicate chart maintenance, as these documents typically include sensitive personal data such as employee names, roles, contact details, and reporting hierarchies, which qualify as identifiable information under regulations like the EU's (GDPR). Sharing or storing such charts without proper safeguards risks unauthorized access or breaches, mandating compliance measures including data minimization, access controls, and consent protocols—especially pertinent in 2025 amid heightened enforcement and global data flows. Non-compliance can result in fines up to 4% of annual global turnover, underscoring the need for encrypted storage and role-based access in digital formats. Implementation pitfalls arise when organizations over-rely on charts for decision-making, fostering "chart-driven" approaches that prioritize formal hierarchies over actual workflows and informal interactions, often leading to misguided strategies. For instance, inaccurate or static charts can precipitate failed restructurings by overlooking real , resulting in inefficient or communication breakdowns during transitions. This over-dependence ignores emergent collaboration patterns, exacerbating issues in agile environments where rigid visuals fail to capture fluid responsibilities.

References

  1. [1]
    8.3 The Organization Chart – Foundations of Business, 2nd Edition ...
    An organization's structure is represented in an organization chart—a diagram showing the interrelationships of its positions. This chart highlights the chain ...
  2. [2]
    Organization Charts - DGS.ca.gov
    Organization Charts or Org Charts provide an overview of reporting relationships between positions and levels of supervision and responsibilities.
  3. [3]
    The cases of Daniel McCallum and Gustavus Swift
    In sketching these lines of authority on paper, McCallum created what might have been the first organizational chart for an American business (Chandler 1962).
  4. [4]
    14.2 Organizational Structures and Their History
    Organizational structure defines how job tasks are formally divided, grouped, and coordinated. The structure of an organization usually features six different ...
  5. [5]
    Organizational Chart for the State Department, 1909
    A transcription of the original 64 x 92 cm handwritten chart drafted by Huntington Wilson, which was the model used for the reorganization and modernization ...
  6. [6]
    [PDF] MODULE 15 Diagram the organizational structure of your company.
    Usually the business will develop an organizational chart showing the structure of the organization and the relationship among workers and divisions of work.<|control11|><|separator|>
  7. [7]
    Chapter 9., Section 1. Organizational Structure: An Overview
    Learn how to develop a framework that gives members clear guidelines on building organizational structure, and keeping the organization functional.Missing: history | Show results with:history
  8. [8]
    An Organizational Chart in Health Care Explained - Tulane University
    Apr 14, 2024 · Organizations may be structured using one of five designs: hierarchical, flat, functional, divisional, or matrix. Large hospitals and healthcare ...
  9. [9]
    10.3 The Basic Building Blocks of Organizational Structure
    An organizational chart is a diagram that depicts a firm's structure. Informal Linkages, Informal linkages are unofficial relationships such as friendships that ...
  10. [10]
    Organizational Chart: Types, Meaning, and How It Works
    An organizational chart, or org chart, graphically represents an organization's structure by detailing the roles, responsibilities, and relationships ...Missing: authoritative sources
  11. [11]
    Organizational Charts: Definition, Types, and Best Practices - Atlassian
    An organizational chart shows your company's structure, demonstrating how departments and employees relate to one another.Missing: authoritative | Show results with:authoritative
  12. [12]
    What an Organization Chart Shows: Key Components and Importance
    Oct 3, 2025 · An organisation chart is a visual representation of a company's structure, showing roles, responsibilities, and reporting relationships. These ...
  13. [13]
    What is an Organigram? - Functionly
    An organigram or organogram is a visual representation of the structure of a company; an organizational chart. Both spellings are used interchangeably.Missing: terminology | Show results with:terminology
  14. [14]
    COV IT Glossary - O:- Organizational Breakdown Structure (OBS)
    Definition. A hierarchically organized depiction of the project organization arranged so as to relate the work packages to the performing organizational units.
  15. [15]
    12 Types of Diagrams and How to Choose the Right One - Venngage
    Mar 12, 2025 · A flowchart is a diagram that visualizes a process or workflow, often one that has multiple turning points or paths. Typically, you use boxes ...
  16. [16]
    11 Types of Diagrams: Choosing the Right One For Your Project | Miro
    eliminating guesswork and uncertainty. Network diagrams: ...
  17. [17]
    How to Adapt Your Organizational Structure - HBS Online
    Jan 7, 2025 · Organizational structure is your company's administrative framework, comprising everything from individual roles and team layouts to business-wide hierarchies.
  18. [18]
    What Is an Organizational Chart and Why Is It Important? - Workleap
    Jan 1, 2024 · Organizational charts (or hierarchy charts) are the graphical representation of an organization's structure. Its purpose is to illustrate ...Missing: authoritative | Show results with:authoritative
  19. [19]
    What Scientific Research Says About Employee Onboarding - Preppio
    Organizations with a standardized onboarding process experience 50% greater new-hire productivity reducing the time to add real value to the company or ...
  20. [20]
    How to identify the right 'spans of control' for your organization
    Dec 21, 2017 · We have identified five managerial archetypes to guide the process: player/coach, coach, supervisor, facilitator and coordinator.<|control11|><|separator|>
  21. [21]
    7 Types of Organizational Structures +Examples - Whatfix
    Mar 15, 2022 · Organizational structure is the foundation for a companies' success. Here are the most common types of org structure with examples.Missing: authoritative | Show results with:authoritative
  22. [22]
    Big data in the age of the telegraph | McKinsey
    Mar 1, 2013 · Daniel McCallum created the first organization chart in response to the information problem hobbling one of the longest railroads in the world.
  23. [23]
    The First Org Chart Ever Made Is a Masterpiece of Data Design
    Mar 18, 2014 · This flowery organizational chart was created by Daniel McCallum, the company's general manager, to efficiently deliver critical information and delegate tasks ...Missing: Prussian army influence
  24. [24]
    How the Rise of the Railroads Gave Way to the World's First Org Chart
    Feb 15, 2023 · In 1855 leading management thinker Daniel McCallum was brought in to help the New York and Erie Railroad organize its sprawling operation across the Northeast.
  25. [25]
    How the Department of War Helped Build the First US Railroads
    Mar 10, 2025 · In this article, I argue that leaders of the U.S. Department of War and U.S. Army developed the organizational form and management practices ...
  26. [26]
    Ford Motor Company Organization Chart, November 1, 1919
    The chart shows a formal chain of command from president Edsel Ford down through company officers, superintendents, managers, and department heads.
  27. [27]
    [PDF] The Department of Defense 1947 - 1997, Organization and Leaders,
    The Department of Defense was established in 1947, evolving from a small office to a large one, with major reorganizations in 1949, 1953, 1958, and 1986.
  28. [28]
    https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/business-and-management/hierarchical-organizational-structure
  29. [29]
    Hierarchical Organizational Structure | Research Starters - EBSCO
    A hierarchical organizational structure is a type of organization layout based on specific criteria of hierarchies. They are one of the oldest and most long- ...Abstract · Overview · ApplicationsMissing: authoritative | Show results with:authoritative
  30. [30]
    [PDF] Fortune 500 C-Suite Snapshot: Profiles in Functional Leadership
    Our research focuses on the most common func- tional roles as well as significant up-and-coming C-suite roles, such as chief inclusion and diversity officer and ...
  31. [31]
    Organizational Structure – Foundations of Commerce
    The vertical connecting lines in the organization chart show the firm's chain of command: the authority relationships among people working at different levels ...
  32. [32]
    [PDF] The Matrix Organization - TN.gov
    What Is A Matrix Organization? A matrix organization is defined as one in which there is dual or multiple managerial accountability and responsibility.
  33. [33]
    The Matrix Organization - PMI
    A matrix organization is defined as one in which there is dual or multiple managerial accountability and responsibility.
  34. [34]
    [PDF] Matrix Management for Aerospace 2000
    May 5, 1980 · The matrix management approach to program management is an organized approach to attain- ing program objectives by defining and structuring ...
  35. [35]
    Flat organisational structure | nibusinessinfo.co.uk
    The span of control is wide with each management level controlling a broad area or group. Employees all report to one or few overall managers and are empowered ...<|separator|>
  36. [36]
    How to Manage Span of Control Effectively - Functionly
    A flat organization may have a wider span of control than a hierarchical organization ... Some examples of wide spans of control are: A factory manager who ...
  37. [37]
    What Is a Flat Organizational Structure? AIHR - HR Glossary
    A flat organizational structure has few management levels, promoting faster decision-making, employee autonomy, and reduced management costs.
  38. [38]
    The Nature Of Leadership In A Flat Organization - Forbes
    Oct 23, 2018 · A flat structure elevates each employee's responsibility inside the organization and eliminates excess management layers to improve coordination ...
  39. [39]
    Flat Organization Structure: Why Do They Matter? - Business.com
    Jun 26, 2025 · What are the advantages of a flat organizational structure? · 1. Allows for faster decision-making. · 2. Promotes creativity and innovation. · 3.
  40. [40]
    Working in a Flatter Organisational Hierarchy: Pros and Cons - Hays
    Explore the advantages and challenges of flatter workplace structures - from improved collaboration and autonomy to potential role ambiguity and leadership ...Missing: chart characteristics challenges
  41. [41]
    Levels without Bosses? Entrepreneurship and Valve's ...
    Jul 14, 2021 · Valve is a “flat” company without a management hierarchy or traditional boss roles: instead of top-down organization and management, Valve employees are free ...
  42. [42]
    Organization without Hierarchy: A Case Study of Valve Corporation
    Aug 30, 2021 · Valve Corporation represents an intriguing case study of flat structure and self organization (Puranam & Håkonsson, 2015; Valve, 2012). The ...
  43. [43]
    Procter & Gamble's Organizational Structure (An Analysis) - Panmore
    Oct 25, 2024 · Procter & Gamble's organizational structure and corporate structural design are analyzed in this consumer goods company business case study.
  44. [44]
    Divisional Organizational Structure: A Complete Guide 2025 - CHRMP
    Apr 10, 2025 · Example: Procter & Gamble (P&G) operates with product-based divisions like Beauty, Grooming, Health Care, and Fabric & Home Care. Each division ...
  45. [45]
    Divisional Organizational Structure: Definition, Best Practices ...
    Rating 5.0 (1) Sep 17, 2025 · A divisional structure splits the organization into self-contained units or divisions. This makes each one responsible for its own performance.What are the different types of... · What are some tips for using a...
  46. [46]
    General Electric's (GE) Organizational Structure: An Analysis
    Dec 14, 2024 · GE uses a product-type divisional structure with companywide executive teams, and geographical divisions, supporting product-specific ...
  47. [47]
    What is a Divisional Structure? Advantages, Types & Examples
    Jan 28, 2025 · Divisions can easily become siloed, making it difficult to coordinate throughout the larger organization.
  48. [48]
    5 types of organisation structure with their benefits and disadvantages
    General Electric (GE): GE is a classic example of a divisional organisation. The company is divided into several independent divisions, such as GE Aviation ...<|separator|>
  49. [49]
    10.2 Why Organizational Design? – Strategic Management
    The way that GE was organized fueled this belief. GE's organizational structure includes six divisions, each devoted to specific product categories: (1) Energy ...
  50. [50]
    Procter & Gamble's Organizational Structure - Organimi
    Procter & Gamble's organizational structure is product-type divisional in nature, and the company is divided into five industry-based sector business units ( ...
  51. [51]
    Where did the first Org Chart come from? - Nakisa
    This blog traces the origins of the organizational chart to the 1855 New York and Erie Railroad diagram, one of the first visualizations of a company's ...
  52. [52]
    Org Chart Tools: An Evolution from Manual to Cloud-based
    In the past, org charts were typically created manually using paper and pencil. With the advent of computers, desktop software like Visio became a popular tool ...
  53. [53]
    Organization Chart Software | Microsoft Visio
    Choose from dozens of premade templates, starter diagrams, and stencils—and use the software's customization options to ensure everything is on brand.
  54. [54]
    Org Chart Software: Easily Build Organizational Charts & Plans
    OrgChart can save you hours of time. Automatically create, update, and customize org charts with real-time data taken directly from your HR systems.Welcome to the New OrgChart · OrgChart vs Excel · OrgChart vs Visio · Pricing
  55. [55]
    Organization Management and Chart Software | Workday US
    With organization management in Workday, you can model business changes, act on data-driven insights, and adjust to evolving market conditions. We combine org ...
  56. [56]
    Org Chart - BambooHR
    How to Create an Org Chart in 5 Steps · 1. Determine the Purpose · 2. Figure Out Who's Who · 3. Pick a Platform · 4. Consider a Template · 5. Update as Needed.Types of Org Charts Used by... · How to Create an Org Chart in...
  57. [57]
    Create an organization chart in Visio - Microsoft Support
    You can arrange the Layout of org chart, space between shapes, the height and width of shapes, using the various commands and options on the Org Chart tab.
  58. [58]
    Organizational Chart Maker: Free Org Chart Creator - Lucidchart
    Visualize your team structure by creating an org chart in Lucidchart. You can use one of our templates or start from scratch, and we make it easy to collaborate ...
  59. [59]
    The OrgChart Now, The #1 Online Org Chart Solution
    Apr 7, 2023 · Real-time automatic org chart updates. · Visibility into vital metrics to measure the effect of your strategies. · Develop and execute plans in ...Missing: features | Show results with:features
  60. [60]
    OrgChart | Workday Marketplace
    With the OrgChart Workday integration, automatically create, customize, and share accurate org charts in seconds. OrgChart aggregates data from multiple HR ...
  61. [61]
    View the Company Directory and Org Chart - BambooHR's Help Article
    To access the org chart, click on the People tab and select Org Chart in the top right corner. The view of the org chart will default to the top-level company ...
  62. [62]
    https://www.lucidchart.com/pages/how-to-make-an-org-chart
  63. [63]
    Create an org chart - Lucid Help
    Oct 6, 2025 · Easily visualize and manage the hierarchical structure of your organization with Lucidchart org charts. Whether you're a startup or a global corporation, we've ...
  64. [64]
    How to make an organizational chart - Lucidchart
    Open the context panel by double-clicking on a shape in your org chart. · Click Layout > Visualization and select “Create Group View.” · Click “Choose Field.” ...
  65. [65]
    AI Org Chart | Generate Org Charts Instantly - Miro
    Create org charts instantly with Miro's AI. Transform team descriptions into visual hierarchies. Collaborate in real-time and export easily.
  66. [66]
    The AI Advantage: Redesigning Organizational Structures with ...
    Features like automatic pattern detection, optimization algorithms, and scenario planning will become standard. Advanced AI chart makers will automatically ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  67. [67]
    https://upraise.io/blog/goals-organizational-charts-blueprint-for-business-success/
  68. [68]
    Organizational Design and Talent Planning are Key to M&A Success
    By focusing on effective organization design and talent management, businesses can navigate the complexities of M&A and emerge as stronger, more competitive ...
  69. [69]
    Clear Goals and Organizational Charts: Blueprint for Success
    Jul 11, 2025 · Organizational charts make it easier for everyone to understand roles, responsibilities and the decision-making process, from top management to ...Why Are Clear Goals Critical... · 2. Aligned Team Efforts · Tools To Streamline Goals...
  70. [70]
    How to Perform Talent Mapping (+ Role of Org Chart Tool)
    Feb 12, 2025 · Talent mapping is the process of identifying, assessing, and developing the skills and capabilities within your existing workforce.What Is Talent Mapping? · Benefits of Talent Mapping · Talent Mapping Process: A...
  71. [71]
    Google's (Alphabet's) Organizational Structure Design - An Analysis
    Nov 15, 2024 · Google has a cross-functional matrix organizational structure. The company maintains flatness as a major factor that influences functions throughout the ...
  72. [72]
    17 Examples of Organizational Charts: A Quick Guide - Miro
    Oct 10, 2025 · Explore real-life examples of organizational charts from various industries and try out free templates to put into practice now.<|separator|>
  73. [73]
    How Flat Organizational Structure Can Foster Sustainable Growth
    Oct 24, 2024 · Greater Innovation: The autonomy in a flat structure can encourage creativity and initiative, making companies more adaptable and innovative.
  74. [74]
    [PDF] An Analysis of Historical Transformation of an IT Giant Based on ...
    This case investigates the problems that IBM was facing during the time, and the strategic decisions it took to help it transform this position. Through the ...Missing: chart shift
  75. [75]
    IBM's Turnaround Under Lou Gerstner, Business & Management ...
    May 29, 2019 · Many were shocked when IBM asked Lou Gerstner, then CEO of RJR Nabisco to take the helm of floundering IBM in the early 1990s.Missing: chart | Show results with:chart
  76. [76]
    Case Study: IBM's Turnaround Under Lou Gerstner
    Gerstner remodeled the IBM structure so that IBM could cater to e-business requirement of its customers ( IBM IT On Demand, grid computing and autonomic ...
  77. [77]
    Federal government structure | GSA
    Sep 2, 2025 · Government Organizational Chart A visual representation of the federal government agency structure. Print Page Print this page Email Page.
  78. [78]
    Government Agency Organizational Chart Best Practices
    Jun 23, 2023 · Organizational charts play a vital role in demystifying government agency operations. They give the public insights into internal hierarchy ...
  79. [79]
    Government Hierarchy Chart: Best Practices + Guide - OrgChart
    Jun 23, 2023 · This article serves as a comprehensive guide to organizational charts for government agencies. We will explore the benefits and best practices.
  80. [80]
    Nonprofit Organizational Charts: What are They and ... - Donorbox
    Rating 4.8 (234) · $0.00 to $475.00These org charts will help your board, staff, and donors understand individual roles and how they affect your nonprofit's mission.
  81. [81]
    Organizational Chart for Non-profits - Miro
    Oct 10, 2025 · A nonprofit organizational chart outlines the main roles and responsibilities, helping everyone understand reporting lines, make decisions, and work together ...
  82. [82]
    The U.S. Army's Command Structure
    The U.S. Army Command Structure, which includes all Army Commands (ACOM), Army Service Component Commands (ASCC) and Direct Reporting Units (DRU).
  83. [83]
    University Organizational Structure Template - How to Create One
    Sep 11, 2025 · Learn how to create an org chart for a university, including key structures, types of org charts, and tips to create one for yourself.
  84. [84]
    Main Bodies | United Nations
    The main bodies of the United Nations are the General Assembly, the Security Council, the Economic and Social Council, the Trusteeship Council, ...UN System · Secretariat · UN Charter · Trusteeship Council
  85. [85]
    Informal Networks: The Company Behind the Chart
    These informal networks can cut through formal reporting procedures to jump start stalled initiatives and meet extraordinary deadlines. But informal networks ...
  86. [86]
    Mintzberg's theory on organisations | ACCA Qualification | Students
    Mintzberg's model breaks down the organisation into five generic components, considering the role of each in relation to coordinating its activities.
  87. [87]
    The Problem with Org Charts - IT Revolution
    May 28, 2020 · Thinking of the org chart as a faithful representation of how work gets done and how teams interact with each other leads to ineffective decisions.Missing: cluttered | Show results with:cluttered
  88. [88]
    Is Your Team Still Manually Updating Your Org Chart? There's ... - Sift
    Aug 27, 2020 · As organizations become more agile and distributed, maintaining an accurate view of where your people fit becomes increasingly challenging.
  89. [89]
    Why Your Employees Really Resist Change - Forbes
    Dec 11, 2023 · One of the biggest reasons why employees resist change is because it makes them feel like they are losing control over their work, creating a heightened sense ...
  90. [90]
    Navigating Complexity: Designing an Org Chart for Large Companies
    Mar 27, 2024 · Maintaining accuracy with rapid changes is a challenge. Striking the right balance in detail while ensuring ongoing accuracy is critical for ...
  91. [91]
    GDPR Compliance for US Companies - Organimi Org Chart Blog
    Jul 24, 2020 · Under the GDPR, a data subject is any individual living within the EU whose personal data is being processed, and this includes US citizens ...
  92. [92]
    GDPR compliance checklist - GDPR.eu
    Use this GDPR compliance checklist to plan your organization's data privacy and security measures. Document your steps to show compliance.Missing: chart | Show results with:chart
  93. [93]
    7 Ways Your Org Chart Is Failing Your Company | Pingboard Blog
    Feb 26, 2019 · 7 Ways Your Org Chart Is Failing Your Company · 1. Not Adaptive Enough · 2. Doesn't Explain Accountabilities · 3. Doesn't Support Workforce ...<|control11|><|separator|>