Beyond the Flatness Fad: How Structured Hierarchies Build True Psychological Safety

Years ago, organizations began a quest for flatter structures, hoping that fewer layers, fewer formalities, and fewer rules would fix workplace challenges. The assumption was straightforward: less hierarchy meant more openness, more innovation, and, implicitly, a healthier workplace. We didn't even have a name for the concept; we were searching for psychological safety. Without fully understanding what was needed, we hoped that flatter structures would cure a workplace filled with barriers, stifled voices, and disengaged employees. However, like many in-office changes we have seen over the years, such as open-concept designs and hot desking, it is more a well intention fad rather than grounded in reality.

Looking back, it's clear that flattening the organization wasn't enough. In many cases, it created new issues: role ambiguity, unclear paths for feedback, and a diffuse sense of responsibility. As we now know, actual psychological safety, where employees feel safe taking risks, voicing concerns, and trusting their colleagues requires more than just fewer layers. Research suggests that a structured approach with clear roles and accountability may be the real foundation of a psychologically safe workplace.

Flattening as a Well-Intentioned But Misguided Fix

The drive to flatten organizations was rooted in good intentions. At the time, hierarchy seemed synonymous with rigidity, formality, and control. Reducing hierarchy promised freedom, where employees could collaborate openly, and decisions could be made more quickly. The goal was to create workplaces where everyone had a voice and innovation could flourish without traditional bottlenecks.

However, as organizations rushed to flatten, we overlooked a key element: without a structure supporting clear communication and accountability, workplaces can become more chaotic and psychologically unsafe. Employees in flatter organizations frequently ask, "Who's responsible for this?" or "Where can I raise this issue?"—questions that reveal a fundamental lack of clarity and structure.

A 2022 study published in the Journal of Organizational Behavior found that employees in flat structures often felt they lacked a reliable path to escalate concerns. Ironically, the changes meant to create openness sometimes led to silence, as employees felt unsure about raising sensitive issues or reporting potential risks. With the structural support of clear roles, accountability, and trusted channels for feedback, we could have done better on psychological safety.

The Real Foundations of Psychological Safety: Structure, Not Just Freedom

Psychological safety isn't a result of removing structure; it's a result of creating an environment where employees feel secure taking risks, knowing they have reliable support. This sense of safety often depends on clear, predictable frameworks where everyone understands their role, responsibilities, and the pathways available for voicing concerns.

Structured hierarchies have long been the norm in high-stakes industries like healthcare, aviation, and emergency services—not to enforce control but to enhance safety. In these fields, well-defined roles and clear communication channels ensure critical information flows to the right people at the right time. Studies from high-reliability organizations (HROs) demonstrate that hierarchical structures can be essential for creating predictability and accountability, two factors underpinning psychological safety.

In a psychologically safe workplace, employees feel empowered to speak up. But this openness requires more than goodwill—it requires clear, structured channels for communication. In flatter organizations, communication lines can become blurred. Without a clear reporting structure, employees may hesitate to raise concerns, fearing they'll get lost or ignored altogether.

Research shows that hierarchical structures with designated reporting paths support psychological safety by ensuring every concern has a reliable upward path. In high-reliability organizations, these communication channels are carefully designed so that issues can escalate quickly and appropriately, reducing the risk of oversight. Rather than stifling voices, structured hierarchies can ensure that every voice is heard.

One of the unintended consequences of flattening organizations was an increase in role ambiguity. In flatter structures, responsibility can often feel diffuse, with no one clearly accountable for addressing specific issues. By contrast, structured hierarchies allow for specialized roles—safety officers, compliance managers, and team leads—who can provide expertise and guidance when needed.

A 2023 study in the Journal of Occupational Health Psychology found that employees reported concerns more securely when their organizations included specialized roles dedicated to safety and compliance. Knowing there are specific, trusted individuals who handle critical issues creates a sense of support that is central to psychological safety. Employees can focus on their work, confident that they are part of a system where responsibility is clear and support is always available.

Trust and Consistency: Hierarchies that Empower Psychological Safety

One of the most surprising findings in recent research is that structured leadership doesn't hinder psychological safety—it actually enhances it. Leaders who enforce policies consistently and communicate openly can create a strong foundation of trust. Employees feel safe when they know that leaders will handle concerns predictably and fairly, which is why structured hierarchies with transparent, accessible leaders often report higher levels of trust.

A review in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health highlights that employees in hierarchical organizations often report higher levels of trust when those hierarchies prioritize open leadership and transparency. In these environments, leaders aren't distant authority figures; they're stable, reliable figures who create predictability and clarity. This stability encourages employees to voice concerns, knowing they'll be addressed fairly and without fear.

The Future of Psychological Safety: Adaptive, Structured Hierarchies

As we move forward, we must redefine our understanding of hierarchy and structure in the workplace. Rather than rigid top-down systems, adaptive hierarchies offer flexibility within a structured framework, providing clarity and role security while allowing teams to adjust as needed. These modern, adaptive hierarchies enable employees to work autonomously but provide clear channels for guidance and escalation, fostering psychological safety through a reliable, supportive structure.

This approach, combining flexibility with structure, may be the solution we were seeking all along. Instead of chasing flatness, we can focus on creating hierarchical frameworks where employees feel empowered to contribute, knowing they're part of a system designed to support and protect them.

Ultimately, our focus on flatness led us astray in pursuing psychological safety. Evidence suggests that safety comes not from removing hierarchy but from reimagining it as a framework that prioritizes clarity, accountability, and support. By adopting structured hierarchies with transparent communication, specialized roles, and consistent leadership, organizations can foster workplaces where employees feel safe to speak up, take risks, and work confidently within a supportive framework.

Psychological safety isn't about stripping away layers but building a structure where every layer supports a culture of openness, trust, and accountability. As we evolve our workplaces, let's move beyond the myth of the flat organization and toward a future where structure and safety go hand in hand.