We hear it constantly. Startups love to claim they possess a "flat" structure. They say everyone is equal. They say titles are irrelevant. It sounds wonderful. It sounds democratic. It sounds like a utopia where ideas flow freely and authority is a relic of the past.

We disagree.

We believe this concept is a dangerous illusion. When you remove explicit structure, you rarely get equality. Instead, you get implicit structure. You get a shadow hierarchy based on charisma, tenure, or loudness. This is far worse than a formal chart. In a formal hierarchy, you know who holds authority. You know who is responsible. In a flat structure, power is invisible. It is unaccountable.

1. The Tyranny of Structurelessness

Jo Freeman wrote about this decades ago. She argued that there is truly zero such thing as a structureless group. Any group of people will create a structure. It is inevitable. By refusing to formalize it, you merely hide it. This makes it impossible to challenge. How do you hold a leader accountable if they refuse to admit they are a leader?

We prefer clarity. We define roles. We define responsibilities. We define who makes the final call. This is clarity. This is honesty.

2. Accountability Requires Names

When a decision fails, we need to know who made it. This is vital for learning. In a flat structure, decisions often happen by "consensus." This means everyone agrees, so everyone is responsible. And when everyone is responsible, zero people are responsible.

We assign a Directly Responsible Individual (DRI) for every project. That person owns the success. That person owns the failure. They have the authority to decide. They have the burden of the outcome. This drives performance.