Hierarchy is not accountability.
Use both charts. They solve different problems—and the gap between them is often where execution breaks.
- Organized around people and titles
- Shows management hierarchy
- Useful for communication and supervision
- Organized around seats and outcomes
- Shows decision and result ownership
- Useful for execution and scale
The test
If a name disappeared tomorrow, could you still describe the seat, its outcomes, its authority, and how success is measured? If not, the role may have been built around the person.
Who is actually in the organization?
Add people as they exist today. Titles and reporting lines create the org chart; seat assignments will create the accountability chart.
What does the company need someone to own?
Define seats without accommodating the current team. A strong seat has a clear outcome, accountabilities, decision rights, and a number.
Move the people. Keep the seats honest.
Drag a person onto a seat—or select a person, then click a seat. Switch lenses to see why reporting structure and accountability are not the same thing.
PEOPLE
SEAT INSPECTOR
Where does the company need a decision?
This is not a talent score. It separates person fit from structural constraints and turns the map into action.
Keep every seat honest.
Run this quarterly—or whenever strategy changes—to reassess GWC, capacity, succession, vacancies, temporary coverage, and structural Issues.
0%
Seats with one accountable owner
0%
Gets it, wants it, capacity to do it
0%
Seats with a named backup or plan
| Seat | Owner | G / W / C | Capacity | Successor / coverage | Quarterly decision | L10 |
|---|
Proposed organizational move
Model a move before changing the live accountability chart.
L10 structural Issues
The problems the leadership team must identify, discuss, and solve.