What is horizontal management and how to implement it?

Horizontal management: definition and principles

Horizontal management is a mode of organization that reduces — or even eliminates — the intermediate hierarchical levels to place employees, managers and leaders on an equal footing in decision-making. Also called collaborative management or flat hierarchy, it is opposed to traditional pyramidal vertical management.

Appearing in the 90s in North America, this model has gained popularity with the rise of agile organizations and corporate cultures centered on autonomy. Its founding principle: each member of the organization contributes to strategic thinking and operational decisions, regardless of their level in the organizational chart.

In a horizontal organization, silos disappear. The middle levels disappear, which breaks the distance between management and the operational teams to create a real proximity. Management functions retain their responsibilities, but they integrate each employee into decision-making and strategic thinking. All employees, managers and leaders work hand in hand on a daily basis.

Horizontal management is generally adopted naturally by start-ups and VSMEs. On the other hand, within an SME or a large company, this management style is generally more complex to deploy — which does not mean that it is out of reach.

Horizontal management, holacracy, self-management, liberated company: what are the differences?

These terms are often used interchangeably, wrongly. They share a common foundation — autonomy and trust — but differ in their degree of formalization:

• Horizontal management : a generic term for any organization with a flat hierarchy, with horizontal and collaborative decision-making.
• Holacracy : A formalized system, created by Brian Robertson, that structures the organization into governance circles with explicit roles and codified decision-making processes.
• Self-management : each team manages its own objectives, budgets and recruitments without hierarchical validation. The Dutch manufacturer Buurtzorg, with its independent nursing teams, is one of the most documented examples.
• Liberated company : a concept popularized by Isaac Getz, who goes further by removing most managerial controls in favor of a radical trust in employees.

Understanding these nuances allows you to choose the model that best suits your organization’s culture and maturity, rather than applying a one-size-fits-all recipe.

Why set up horizontal management?

Implementing horizontal management can be very beneficial, with both collective and individual benefits. But let’s be clear: these benefits only materialize if the transition is rigorously supported.

Improve workplace well-being and engagement

The collaborative management mode places the employee at the center of the company. Managers and leaders put the well-being and fulfillment of their operational team members first. Employee buy-in and involvement are intrinsic to the implementation of horizontal management.

Employees, who are very involved in the company’s strategic decisions, have a great deal of freedom and are strongly encouraged to take initiatives, to share their suggestions, but also their fears and needs.

This strengthens commitment and motivation on a daily basis, and allows the employee to regain meaning, interest and usefulness in his or her job. According to Gallup’s State of the Global Workplace 2026 report, only 23% of global employees say they are engaged in their work — a figure that underscores the urgency of rethinking managerial models (Gallup, 2026).

This type of management also helps to strengthen team cohesion, mutual aid, listening and benevolence — all aspects that contribute to improving the quality of life at work.

Horizontal decision-making to simplify and streamline exchanges

Horizontal management emphasizes siloed, instantaneous communication facilitated by collaborative digital tools. Exchanges are simplified, information circulates faster and more clearly, which also has the effect of increasing the responsiveness of the teams and speeding up processes.

In an analysis published in 2026, McKinsey observes that organizations that adopt flatter structures and distributed decision-making processes gain speed of execution and significantly reduce time to market (McKinsey, 2026).

Increase business performance

According to a study by the University of Warwick relayed by Bpifrance, a higher level of happiness at work is associated with an increase of about 12% in productivity. A fulfilled employee is therefore more efficient, which contributes to increasing the company’s performance (Bpifrance — University of Warwick).

With horizontal management, the company also gains in agility. Teams are more proactive, dynamic, and collective intelligence boosts creativity and innovation. Deloitte’s Global Human Capital Trends 2026 report confirms this trend: organizations that operate in a network rather than a pyramid show a much greater ability to adapt to market disruptions (Deloitte, 2026).

Horizontal management is therefore a powerful lever for increasing the profitability of your company.

Adapting to changes in the business world

The traditional, vertical system of organization has less and less place in the face of current and future challenges :

• Innovation of managerial and organizational practices,
• Digitalization of services and business processes,
• Transformation of working methods (teleworking, hybrid, flex office),
• Rise of artificial intelligence and automation,
• CSR issues and growing societal expectations,
• Talent shortage and the war for skills.

Adopting a horizontal management style allows you to live in accordance with these transformations and to promote the performance and competitiveness of the company and the well-being of its teams.

The limits and challenges of horizontal management

To present horizontal management as a miracle solution would be misleading. This model has real limitations, which any organization must anticipate before embarking on this path.

The risk of organizational vagueness

Without a clear framework, the abolition of hierarchical levels can lead to confusion about responsibilities. Who decides when two teams disagree? Who bears the final responsibility for a project? The lack of answers to these questions creates grey areas that slow down decisions instead of speeding them up.

Decision overload

Involving every employee in strategic decisions can backfire on the organization. When everyone decides, no one decides. Some companies that have adopted holacracy — such as Zappos in the United States — have found that the multiplication of governance meetings can become counterproductive and exhausting for teams.

Adaptation to certain contexts

Horizontal management is difficult to operate in highly regulated environments (pharmaceutical, aeronautics, nuclear) where the chain of responsibility must remain traceable and formalized. It can also come up against corporate cultures that are deeply rooted in the directive model, where the transition requires long-term support.

The trap of “false horizontality”

Some organizations display horizontal management on the façade while maintaining implicit control mechanisms. This dissonance between rhetoric and reality generates a loss of trust that is much more damaging than assumed vertical management. As the Revue Gestion points out, the consistency between the announced commitments and actual practices remains the first factor in the credibility of a horizontal management approach (Revue Gestion).

Concrete examples of companies with horizontal management

Several organizations have adopted forms of horizontal management, with contrasting results that shed light on the conditions for the success of this model.

Buurtzorg (Netherlands): Self-management in home care

Founded in 2006 by Jos de Blok, this home nursing company operates with autonomous teams of 10 to 12 caregivers, without an intermediate manager. Each team manages its schedule, recruitments and budget. As a result, Buurtzorg is consistently cited as one of the best employers in the Netherlands, with some of the highest patient satisfaction rates in the industry.

Gore-Tex (W.L. Gore & Associates): The Flat Hierarchy at Scale

This American manufacturer of technical textiles has been operating without a formal organizational chart since its creation. Employees choose their projects, and leaders emerge naturally through the recognition of their peers. With more than 12,000 employees worldwide, Gore is demonstrating that a flat hierarchy can work at scale — if you invest heavily in company culture.

FAVI (France): the liberated company in the industry

This Picardy foundry, managed for 25 years by Jean-François Zobrist, has eliminated time clocks, individual quality controls and most hierarchical levels. The autonomous “mini-factories” each manage a customer from end to end. This model has allowed FAVI to maintain its competitiveness in the face of Chinese competition in a sector under pressure.

Lessons to be learned

These examples share one thing in common: horizontal management only worked because it was driven by a clear vision, a sincere commitment from management and a continuous investment in training and corporate culture. None of these organizations changed overnight.

How to set up horizontal management?

Implementing horizontal management requires a profound transformation, at each level of the company. Here are the main steps to follow to deploy a horizontal organization in a structured way.

1 – Make an inventory of the situation

Before embarking on the management of such a significant change , it is wise to carry out an initial inventory of the managerial situation and the company’s organizational model by asking the right questions:

• What type of management is currently in place?
• Is it very far from horizontal management?
• What are the potential obstacles in the implementation of such a management method?
• Are employees and managers ready to take this turn?
• Are there already existing pockets of autonomy to capitalize on?

2 – Clarify the objective and the strategic issues

It is also necessary to clearly determine the expected objective, as well as the strategic challenges related to such an initiative: strengthening employee well-being and engagement, improving performance, strengthening competitive advantage, improving brand image, promoting a new employer brand, etc.

The trap to avoid: adopting horizontal management as a fad, without any link to a real operational need. The transformation must respond to an identified problem, not a trend.

3 – Define an action plan

Once the final vision has been clarified, it will be necessary to establish an operational plan that will list all the concrete actions to be deployed to activate the change in managerial organization. This roadmap may list possible practices to be put in place, with deadlines and performance indicators (KPIs) to rigorously monitor the progress of this transformation.

This strategic plan will have to be communicated to employees, and it will be necessary to ensure the buy-in of everyone — including middle managers whose role will change profoundly.

4 – Deconstruct the old model and horizontalize its practices

Horizontal management requires a profound questioning of the company’s organizational structure. It is therefore necessary, on the one hand, to deconstruct the old established models, and on the other hand, to establish new horizontal practices:

• Abolish middle management levels or redefine their role,
• Establish a new mode of transversal communication and a regular and benevolent dialogue,
• Redesigning workspaces to facilitate exchanges and collaboration,
• Define the habits and behaviors to be adopted to respond to this new organization,
• Reduce formalism and simplify long and complex procedures,
• Establish a collaborative state of mind, based on mutual aid and listening, in a climate of trust and respect for others.

5 – Install collaborative digital tools

Digital technology is an accelerator to facilitate exchanges and set up immediate, transparent and close communication between each department and between each level of the company. A key step will therefore be to install digital communication and project management tools such as Slack, Notion, Monday or Teams.

But make no mistake: the tool does not make culture. Installing Slack in an organization that operates in silos will not magically create cross-functionality. The tool must accompany a change in behavior, not replace it.

6 – Train the teams

It is also necessary to train managers in this new leadership style, especially when the company has been operating according to a vertical model until now. Managers are then trained in the methods and tools adapted to this more horizontal organization. Through workshops, coaching and training, they gradually develop the skills and qualities necessary for this managerial style.

It is also necessary to train employees in the digital tools adopted and the new behaviors associated with this management style. Team building activities can help employees develop:

• Teamwork and co-responsibility,
• Active listening skills,
• Assertive communication,
• Speaking up and taking initiative,
• Constructive management of disagreements.

7 – Redefining the role of the manager

With horizontal management, the role of the manager changes radically. He is moving from a role of manager and decision-maker to a role of ” coach “. He must therefore get rid of any authoritarianism to gain the trust of his teams, create a close bond, and thus ensure the natural commitment and real motivation of the employee.

Here, the manager supports, helps, listens, encourages autonomy and values the contribution of each person. This repositioning is often the most delicate point of the transition: some managers experience this evolution as a loss of status. Individual support is then recommended to help them find their place in this new framework.

8 – Call on an interim manager to steer the transformation

Implementing horizontal management is an ambitious challenge, which can be time-consuming and complex — especially if the company is a large organization, or if it has long been entrenched in a directive and vertical management style.

This type of management requires collective change, but also and above all individual changes, linked to the behaviors and habits of each individual. As with any profound transformation, resistance to change and fear of the unknown can be real obstacles to the deployment of this new organizational model.

Horizontal vs. Vertical Management: The Major Differences

Elements compared	Horizontal management	Vertical management
Organizational Structure	Flat organization, few hierarchical levels	Pyramidal organization, strong hierarchy
Decision-making	Decentralized, collaborative	Centralized, top-down
Role of the manager	Facilitator, coach, facilitator	Supervisor, Chief, Decision Maker
Accountability	Strong employee autonomy	Responsibilities concentrated at the managerial level
Communication	Horizontal, fluid, transparent	Top-down, more formal
Innovation and creativity	Powered by collective intelligence	Slower, hierarchically validated processes
Responsiveness	High agility, quick adaptation	Slower adaptation, complex processes
Social climate	Trust, involvement, cooperation	Hierarchical distance, greater control
Motivation and commitment	Driven by autonomy and meaning	Driven by rules and guidelines
Adapted type of organization	Dynamic, innovative environments	Highly regulated or traditional industry organizations

This picture highlights structural differences, but the reality is rarely so binary. Many successful organizations combine elements of both approaches, depending on their businesses, size, and cultural maturity.

Call on an interim manager to set up horizontal management

For all these reasons, calling on an interim manager is a particularly wise choice. At Wayden, our interim managers are natural leaders with 15 to 25 years of experience in strategic roles in complex and varied environments.

Thanks to their expertise, their mastery of different management methods and their human qualities, they support companies in abandoning a pyramid model in favor of a more horizontal organization, regardless of the sector of activity, the size of the structure or the objectives sought.

Their added value: an outside view, devoid of internal political games, which makes it possible to identify the real blockages and accelerate the transformation without compromising operational continuity.

FAQ — Your questions about horizontal management

Is horizontal management suitable for all companies?

Horizontal management is particularly suitable for dynamic, innovative or fast-growing organizations. However, it can be deployed in SMEs or large companies, provided that cultural transformation is supported, roles are clarified and teams are trained. The success of its implementation depends above all on the level of support of employees and managerial maturity.

What are the main risks of poorly deployed horizontal management?

Without structured support, horizontal management can lead to role confusion, decision overload or a slowdown in projects. The lack of a clear framework can also cause tension and loss of bearings. This is why it is necessary to define precise objectives, establish operating rules and support managers in their new role.

How long does it take to move from a vertical to a horizontal structure?

The duration depends on the size of the company, its level of maturity and the extent of the cultural changes to be made. As a general rule, a deep managerial transformation extends over several months — sometimes a year or more — with regular monitoring, training, gradual adjustments and structured management. The intervention of an interim manager generally makes the process faster and safer.

What is the difference between horizontal management, holacracy and liberated company?

Horizontal management refers to any approach that reduces hierarchical levels and promotes collective decision-making. Holacracy is a formalized system with defined governance circles and roles. The liberated company, popularized by Isaac Getz, goes further by removing most managerial controls. These three models share a common foundation — autonomy and trust — but differ in their degree of structure.

Can horizontal management coexist with a part of hierarchy?

Yes, and it’s often even the most realistic configuration. Many companies are adopting a hybrid model where certain strategic decisions remain centralized while operational autonomy is strengthened at the team level. This progressive approach makes it possible to benefit from the agility of horizontal management while maintaining a clear decision-making framework on critical issues.