Organizational Design

Strategic Consulting

Organizational structure aligned to your strategy

Design or redesign of organizational structure: optimized organizational chart, role and responsibility definition, governance processes, operating model. Structure that enables strategic execution and eliminates dysfunctional silos.

Redesign Your StructureDownload organizational design guide
20+organizational structures designed
Alineaciónstrategy-structure
Reduction of silos and duplications

Organizational design: your company's architecture

Organizational design is the structured process of defining or redesigning organization architecture: structure (organizational chart, hierarchical levels, area grouping), roles and responsibilities, decision-making processes, coordination mechanisms, operating model. It's how you organize people and resources to execute strategy effectively.

A robust organizational design includes: organizational chart with clear reporting lines, critical role definition (job profiles), RACI responsibility matrix, governance processes (committees, meetings, decisions), inter-area collaboration model, transition plan from current to new structure.

Fundamental principle: "Structure follows strategy" (Chandler). First you define WHAT you want to achieve (strategy), then you design HOW to organize to achieve it (structure). Structure misaligned from strategy generates friction, silos, inefficiency and inability to execute.

When do you need to redesign your structure?

Company scaling rapidly

Accelerated growth (doubling size in 2 years). Informal structure that worked with 30 people collapses with 100+. You need to professionalize.

Dysfunctional departmental silos

Areas operate as independent fiefdoms. Lack of collaboration, problems "thrown over the wall", departmental objectives misaligned from corporate objectives.

Strategy changed but structure didn't

New strategy (new products, markets, business model) but organizational chart remains same. Structure hinders new strategy execution.

Confusing roles and responsibilities

"It's not clear who does what", decisions stuck because no one has ownership, effort duplication, work falling in gaps.

Post-merger or acquisition

Integrating two companies with different structures. You need unified structure that captures synergies and eliminates duplications.

Excessive hierarchical structure

Too many hierarchical levels (7+ levels). Slow decisions, bureaucracy, distance between CEO and operation. You need to flatten.

6 principles of effective organizational design

ALIGNMENT WITH STRATEGY

Structure must enable strategy execution. If strategy is "geographic expansion", structure must reflect it (organize by geographies). If strategy is "product excellence", structure by product lines.

ROLE AND OWNERSHIP CLARITY

Each role must have clear purpose, defined responsibilities and ownership of specific results. Ambiguity generates conflict and work falling in gaps.

APPROPRIATE SPAN OF CONTROL

Managers with 3-10 direct reports typically (depends on complexity). Too few (<3): micromanagement. Too many (>12): lack of supervision. Balance according to context.

MINIMUM HIERARCHICAL LEVELS

Flat structure (4-6 levels) is preferable to tall structure (8+ levels). Fewer levels = faster decisions, better communication, less bureaucracy.

INTEGRATION MECHANISMS

In structures with specialization, you need mechanisms to integrate: cross-functional committees, integrator roles (e.g.: Product Manager), structured collaboration processes.

FLEXIBILITY AND ADAPTABILITY

Structure must be stable but not rigid. Capacity to adapt to market or strategy changes without complete restructuring every year.

5 types of organizational structure

FUNCTIONAL

Grouping by function (Sales, Operations, Finance, HR)

Pros:
  • Specialization
  • Functional efficiency
  • Economies of scale
Cons:
  • Silos
  • Difficult cross-functional coordination
  • Focus on function vs customer
Best for: Small-medium companies, single product/market, stable operations

DIVISIONAL (BY PRODUCT)

Grouping by product line or business unit

Pros:
  • Product focus
  • Autonomy
  • P&L accountability
  • Agility
Cons:
  • Function duplication
  • Lower economies of scale
Best for: Multi-product companies, products with different dynamics

GEOGRAPHIC

Grouping by region/country

Pros:
  • Proximity to local markets
  • Regional adaptation
  • Geographic accountability
Cons:
  • Functional duplication
  • Difficult global standardization
Best for: Multi-country companies, different local regulations

MATRIX

Dual reporting line (e.g.: functional + product, or geography + functional)

Pros:
  • Balances multiple dimensions
  • Flexibility
  • Resource sharing
Cons:
  • Complexity
  • Priority conflict
  • Reporting confusion
Best for: Large, complex companies where balancing multiple dimensions is critical

HYBRID

Combination of models (e.g.: functional at HQ + geographic in regions)

Pros:
  • Adapts design to specific needs of each part
Cons:
  • Can generate inconsistency if poorly designed
Best for: Companies that need flexibility according to area/region

Conclusion: There's no universal "correct" structure. Depends on strategy, size, industry, market.

How we design your organizational structure

1-2 weeks

DIAGNOSIS AND CONTEXT

Review of strategy and business objectives. Current structure analysis (organizational chart, spans, levels). Leadership interviews on current dysfunctions. Industry structure benchmarking. Critical design principles identification.

Current structure diagnosis + design principles
2-3 weeks

STRUCTURE DESIGN

Development of 2-3 structure options (alternative models). Main areas/departments definition. Hierarchical levels and spans of control. Reporting lines. Pros/cons analysis of each option. Validation with CEO/leadership.

Structure options with recommendation
2-3 weeks

ROLE AND GOVERNANCE DEFINITION

Job profiles of key roles (top 15-25 positions). RACI matrix of critical responsibilities. Committees and governance processes design. Decision-making processes. Cross-functional coordination mechanisms.

Job profiles + governance model
1-2 weeks

TRANSITION PLAN

Mapping of current people to new structure. Talent gap identification (roles without person, people without role). Recruitment plan for new roles. Change communication plan. Transition timeline (big bang vs gradual).

Detailed transition plan
1-3 months

IMPLEMENTATION AND SUPPORT

Communication of new structure to organization. Transition support. Coaching leaders in new roles. Adjustments based on operational feedback. New structure effectiveness monitoring.

Structure implemented and functioning

TOTAL DURATION: 6-10 weeks design + 1-3 months implementation

What's included

Analysis and Design

  • Current structure diagnosis
  • Best practices benchmarking
  • 2-3 structure options with pros/cons
  • Detailed organizational chart of recommended structure
  • Change impact analysis

Roles and Responsibilities

  • Job profiles of top 15-25 roles
  • RACI matrix of critical responsibilities
  • Committees and governance definition
  • Decision-making processes
  • Updated job descriptions

Transition Plan

  • People mapping to new structure
  • Talent gap identification
  • Recruitment plan for new roles
  • Transition timeline
  • Change communication plan

Implementation

  • Organization communication
  • Transition support (1-3 months)
  • Leaders coaching in new roles
  • Adjustments based on real operation
  • Effectiveness monitoring

Benefits

100%

Structure alignment with strategy

30-50%

Reduction of silos and friction

25%+

Improvement in decision speed

Claridad

Defined roles and responsibilities

6-10

weeks Complete structure design

Ownership

Clear accountability of results

Frequently Asked Questions

There's no unique formula. We evaluate multiple factors: (1) Strategy: Differentiation by product, geography, customer? Structure must reflect critical strategic dimension. (2) Size: <50 employees: simple functional. 50-500: functional or divisional. 500+: matrix or hybrid. (3) Complexity: Single simple product vs multi-product complex. (4) Market: Local vs multi-country. (5) Culture: Some cultures handle matrix well, others don't. We design 2-3 options and recommend optimal according to context.

Depends on situation. Three common scenarios: (1) Growth (80% of cases): Redesign to scale. New roles, promotions, recruitment. No one leaves. (2) Optimization (15% of cases): Eliminate duplications, flatten levels. May imply moderate reduction (5-10%) or reassignments. (3) Crisis/turnaround (5% of cases): Restructuring with significant reduction. Alternative designs optimal structure independent of people consideration; then client decides what to do with talent gaps/excesses.

Communication and announcement: 1 day (day D). Complete operational transition: 1-6 months according to complexity. Simple changes (adjust reports, move people between areas): 1-2 months. Complex changes (create new divisions, hire 20 people, integrate systems): 4-6 months. Complete cultural adaptation: 6-12 months. Common error: announce new structure and expect it to work immediately. Requires intensive support first 3 months (clarify roles, resolve conflicts, adjust according to reality).

We offer both according to need: (1) Design only: We design structure, deliver transition plan, client executes. (2) Design + implementation: We design AND support transition 1-3 months. We facilitate communication, leaders coaching, conflict resolution, operational adjustments. Model 2 has significantly higher success rate (structure really works vs well-designed structure poorly implemented).

Common situation: VP had 80 reports, new structure has 30. Options: (1) Redefine role: Strategic VP (less operational), (2) Lateral promotion: VP to specialized role of greater value, (3) Negotiated exit: If no fit in new structure. Critical: Early honest communication. Surprises generate massive resistance. We involve leaders in structure co-design when possible (ownership).

Minor review: Annually. Incremental adjustments (reassignments, new roles). Major review: Every 3-5 years or when significant change warrants it: strategy changes dramatically, company doubles size, merger/acquisition, new business line, serious dysfunctions. Signal that you need review: Significant friction, slow decisions, silos, lack of role clarity. Structure must be stable but not rigid. Changing structure every year generates chaos; maintaining it 10 years without review generates obsolescence.

Does your organizational structure need redesign?

30-minute evaluation. We analyze current structure, identify dysfunctions and recommend if redesign is appropriate.

Current organizational chart review
Structural dysfunction identification
Strategy-structure alignment evaluation
Appropriate structure type recommendation
Organizational redesign proposal