How we shift from rigid job titles to roles with a purpose. This article is written by Sally McCutchion, Leading Beyond Hierarchy Coach, Consultant & Facilitator and teacher at our Executive Programme for Design Leaders.
The traditional organisational chart — those familiar boxes and lines cascading down a page — dates back to 1855, when engineer Daniel McCallum designed it to map the structure of the New York & Erie Railroad.
Since then, the world has transformed beyond recognition, yet this same visual tool continues to dominate how we think about leadership, management, and collaboration.
But today, with the rapid rise of AI, that model is being tested and we’re standing at the threshold of an entirely new era of work.
The question all leaders need to be asking of themselves and their org structures is:
How can we prepare for the changes that are coming?
In a piece for the Financial Times, Rachel Botsman asks the question: “What if the way we visualise systems wasn’t a pyramid, but a tree?”
Source: Financial Times - Agentic AI - how bots came for our workflows and drudgery | FT Working It
This shift in metaphor is powerful. The pyramid is rigid, hierarchical, and top-heavy. The tree, by contrast, is organic, branching, interconnected, and alive. If we are to integrate AI into our organisations effectively, perhaps this is the most useful image to keep in mind.
The traditional chart served its time well. It provided clarity, order, and accountability for a world of industrial production and physical infrastructure.
But in today’s knowledge-driven, networked, and increasingly digital economy, it shows its limitations.
The future demands something more dynamic. We are no longer only thinking about lines of management between human beings; we must now consider how to integrate outputs from AI alongside human workers.
This creates an entirely new dynamic, with fresh opportunities — and challenges — for how we design roles, relationships, and workflows.
This is where role mapping becomes such a valuable tool. Instead of focusing on static job titles, role mapping aligns responsibilities and accountabilities with an organisation’s purpose.
It makes the flow of work more transparent, flexible, and adaptive — precisely what we need in a future where some “roles” may be fulfilled by people, others by AI, and many by a collaboration between the two.
Role mapping allows teams to break free from outdated hierarchies and create more clarity and ownership.
As AI starts to take on routine, repetitive, or data-heavy tasks, role mapping can ensure we design structures where humans focus on what only humans can do best: creativity, connection, and imagination.
AI, at its core, is designed to predict. As language models demonstrate, it generates the next statistically average word. Useful, yes. But average. By contrast, humans are not average. We are imaginative, adaptive, and creative. We see patterns where none exist, and we make leaps of intuition that no algorithm can yet replicate.
That’s why the real opportunity lies in integration: giving AI the routine work, while freeing human minds for creativity, imagination, and innovation. But to do this well, we need organisational structures that are fit for purpose.
This is where role mapping becomes essential. Traditional job titles and hierarchies are too rigid for a future where work is shared between humans and machines. Role mapping flips the perspective: instead of mapping people to jobs, it maps roles to purpose.
Role mapping helps your team see what's happening more clearly:
Now imagine extending this process to AI. What roles could be defined for AI tools? How might they sit alongside human responsibilities? Which decisions must remain human-led, and which can be safely delegated? By treating AI as another contributor in the role map — not as a manager, not as a subordinate, but as a collaborator — we can design workflows that feel more like an ecosystem than a machine.
This brings me back to a central question: What might we conceive of when we have more time and capacity?
Over recent decades, we’ve made ourselves incredibly busy — often treating busyness itself as a status symbol. I’ve written previously about how this obsession with ‘hard work’ as an identity can be damaging (Read the article by Sally "Does Hard Work Define Us?") and how our definitions of success are evolving beyond promotions and pay rises.
The arrival of AI could help us reframe again: What might we be able to achieve if we release ourselves from the most repetitive tasks and expand our minds into new areas or possibility? What if “success” in the AI era is not about who works the longest hours, but who harnesses human ingenuity most effectively?
Already, we know the risks of overwork and “busyness culture”. As I’ve written previously, being busy has become a status symbol — but one that drains energy and creativity. If AI removes some of this load, we have the chance to reshape how we define success.
The opportunity is to shift focus towards what humans do best:
The irony is that AI may make work feel more human — if we design for it.
But alongside the opportunities, we also need to acknowledge the risks. One of the most pressing is the future of entry-level roles.
One of the real risks highlighted in current debates about AI is the disappearance of entry-level jobs — the very roles that give people a starting point in their careers. If repetitive or process-driven tasks are automated, where will tomorrow’s leaders cut their teeth? Source: Financial Times - The graduate 'jobpocalypse': Where have all the entry-level jobs gone? | FT Working It'
Role mapping provides a powerful solution. By designing portfolios of roles rather than rigid job descriptions, organisations can shape entry-level positions that adapt to a candidate’s strengths, while also supporting their long-term progression. These portfolios can deliberately include responsibilities that build essential human skills — collaboration, problem-solving, communication — alongside opportunities to learn how to work effectively with emerging AI tools.
Done well, this approach not only safeguards opportunities for newcomers but also prepares them to thrive in the evolving workplace. This is a reminder that if we’re willing to rethink structures, AI doesn’t just eliminate jobs — it creates space for better ones.
Which brings me full circle. The pyramid org structure and linear hierarchy has had its time. If the org chart of the past was a static triangle, the org chart of the future should be a tree: branching, flexible, and rooted in purpose.
Through role mapping, we can visualise organisations as ecosystems — where humans and AI work side by side, where roles evolve with need, and where creativity flourishes because people are free from unnecessary constraints.
AI is not the end of leadership, creativity, or connection. In fact, it may be the beginning of something richer. The challenge is ours to seize.
By embracing role mapping and reimagining the org chart more like a living tree, we can create organisations that are more adaptive, more human, and more regenerative. And that is a future worth working towards.
The article is written by Sally McCutchion. Sally supports growing, purpose-driven organisations to lead beyond hierarchy and become regenerative. Sally has been at the forefront of new ways of working together for over 10 years, is a trusted partner for progressive leaders and a valued teacher at our Executive Programme for Design Leaders.
Unfortunately, the browser you use is outdated and does not allow you to display the site correctly. Please install any of the modern browsers, for example:
Google Chrome Firefox Safari