Tech Explained: Here’s a simplified explanation of the latest technology update around Tech Explained: The org chart is holding back your A.I. strategy in Simple Termsand what it means for users..
“The org chart was built in the industrial age to bring order, predictability, and stability to rapidly growing organisations,” Raman says. “Companies need to let that go, as it’s going to hold back innovation.”
Raman’s argument is not that hierarchy is inherently wrong, but that the industrial logic of the org chart – designed for efficiency, scale, and predictability – is precisely the wrong architecture for capturing the value A.I. makes possible. Where productivity gains from previous technology waves came from doing the same things faster, A.I. creates value through genuine novelty: solving problems in ways that have not existed before, crossing the departmental lines that org charts are designed to enforce.
“Where you’re going to see the real returns on AI isn’t just a new workflow around AI, but rather new work around human capability,” Raman says.
For Australian HR leaders, that distinction carries significant operational weight. Many enterprise A.I. programs have been designed as efficiency plays – automating existing processes, reducing headcount in defined functions, accelerating tasks that were already being done. The LinkedIn executives argue this misses the larger opportunity, and that realising it requires a tolerance for worker-led experimentation that most large Australian organisations have not yet developed.
The skills that survive
Drawing on conversations with neuroscientists, organisational psychologists, behavioural economists, and talent leaders, Roslansky and Raman identify five human capabilities – what they call the 5Cs – that they argue A.I. cannot replace and that employees and employers should be actively developing.