Recently, I read a Business Insider article about the “Great Flattening” — the flattening of corporate hierarchies and the elimination of middle management positions. Around the same time, I came across a LinkedIn Post by André Nery that expanded on this reflection. He raised some very relevant points, especially for those working in design, product, and technology.
André highlighted three major trends:
- GIG economy: More than 50% of the American workforce is now freelance or contract-based, according to Statista.
- No-code/Low-code: Tools that enable creating solutions without the need for large technical teams.
- AI applications: From data analysis to content creation, AI is replacing tasks traditionally performed by humans.
These changes have brought productivity and flexibility gains but also led to the elimination of roles that do not deliver immediate value. When it comes to leadership, this raises a key question: what does “delivering impact” really mean today? And how is it measured?
Leadership in a New Reality
I’ve often found myself reflecting on how hard it is to explain what some layers of management actually do. Who hasn’t come across an org chart with redundant roles that seem to exist just to fill hierarchy gaps?
But now, even high-level positions are being redesigned. I’ve noticed, in recent interviews, that companies increasingly demand leaders who combine strategic thinking with hands-on execution. It’s no longer just about leading or deciding — it’s about actively contributing to tasks, and with quality.
Leaders today are expected to “get their hands dirty,” not just coordinating strategies but also producing tangible results. Whether it’s creating prototypes or materializing ideas, the role has become much more integrated into the operational layer.
Which brings me to a persistent question: are there fewer senior-level operators because many have moved to leadership roles? Or are mid-senior professionals lacking the guidance and references to improve their delivery quality?
The Role of the “Hybrid Leader”
So, does this “hybrid leader” model make sense? Should companies really expect one person to balance such different demands? Or is there simply a need for a smarter hiring strategy that ensures the right profiles are in place, without inflating hierarchies — which, let’s face it, are often unnecessary?
For me, the answer lies in the context. Startups, born lean, may not even need to build complex hierarchies. But as they grow, the transition to a more scalable model is inevitable — and often painful. In contrast, traditional organizations with rigid structures will struggle to adopt this flexibility.
Strategic and Operational: Can We Be Both?
Perhaps the question isn’t whether we need to be strategic or operational, but how we can integrate the two effectively. In design, for instance, this means less about who is using Figma and more about bridging strategy and execution to deliver real value.
This shift demands more than just a hands-on approach; it’s a rethinking of how we define leadership in the digital market. How can we build teams that are lean, agile, and sustainable in the long term?
Are we moving toward a market that values more complete leaders, or are we just overloading those already within the system?