Hierarchical decision-making is rooted in levels of authority, not in depth of expertise and specific knowledge of the situation.

It isn’t entirely foolish, either: Presumably, those higher in the hierarchy (which might be a pun but I doubt it) are there because in the past they demonstrated leadership and good judgment in their areas of responsibility.

The world changes faster, though and the detailed knowledge needed to handle a responsibility increases. The result: Those with the proper authority to make a decision are, to an ever greater extent, insulated from both the knowledge and the information necessary to make it well, let alone fast enough for it to be useful.

It’s fashionable these days to rail against the hierarchical organization. Business pundits frequently claim the age of hierarchy is over. They claim to have developed exciting alternatives, which they’ll sell you for a small fee.

Uh … no. Far from being dead, hierarchical organizational design continues to be inevitable for all but the smallest organizations, and for a very simple reason: There’s no other way to sort out who ought to be responsible for what when coordinating the efforts of a lot of people.