Gartner projects that one in five of companies will eliminate more than half their middle managers by the end of this year. The efficiency story sells itself. Flatten the structure, speed up decisions, improve margins. The savings are real. What won’t show up until 2028 is that you just destroyed the only system that actually developed leaders.
Middle managers made up one-third of all layoffs in 2023. Today, 41% of employees work at companies that cut management layers. And the coordination work didn’t just disappear. Some of it moved to senior leaders who were already underwater. Some of it stopped happening entirely. What also stopped — and what nobody is tracking — is the coaching. Your high-potential employees aren’t learning how to make tough calls anymore. There’s nobody with time to show them how to navigate organizational politics. Nobody is translating what the CEO means into what the team should actually do.
That wasn’t bureaucracy. That was leadership development happening in real time. Cut it and development stops. The formal programs with external facilitators keep running, sure. But the practical learning — where someone makes a bad decision and their manager walks them through why it failed? That’s gone.
One tech company cut 70% of its engineering managers in 2024. It saved $3.2 million. The VP of Engineering now has 47 direct reports. He approves decisions in Slack between meetings — no context, no coaching. Six months in, their best senior engineer quit. The exit interview was blunt: “Nobody here knows what I’m working on or why it matters.” The VP was too swamped to notice she’d checked out until the resignation hit.
Companies flattening their structures assume they can hire senior leaders externally when needed. That assumption is breaking down. Only 6% of Gen Z wants senior leadership roles, according to Deloitte’s research. They watched middle managers get eliminated for efficiency. They learned that building toward management means building toward something your company considers expendable. The pipeline you’re counting on already concluded your leadership path isn’t worth it.
The crisis shows up about two years after the cuts. A VP quits. You look at your org chart for a replacement. Nobody’s close. You offer it to your strongest director. She says no — she saw what happened to the last two people who took that role. So you search externally. That hire lasts maybe 14 months because whatever burned out your last VP is still there.
One logistics company cut 65% of its regional managers in 2023, saving $2.3 million. Last quarter they desperately needed a VP of Operations. Nobody internal was anywhere near ready. The external search failed. Twice. Nobody wanted to join a company known for eliminating the middle layer. They promoted their strongest director anyway. She’s now learning a VP role she needed at least three more years to prepare for. Operations are struggling while she figures it out. And in three years, when the board asks why nobody internal was ready to step up, the answer is going to be sitting in that 2023 efficiency deck.
The math doesn’t work out. You save $2 million cutting managers today. Three years from now you’re spending $4 million replacing the expertise that left, hiring externally at massive premiums because you have zero internal bench, and cleaning up mistakes from underprepared promotions learning roles they weren’t ready for. The CFO sees two line items in different years. The CHRO knows it’s the same strategic failure, just delayed.
Forty percent of current leaders are thinking about quitting, according to DDI’s research. The ones who survived your flattening are buried. Your high-potentials are watching them work themselves to death and reconsidering whether leadership is actually worth it. The external market is full of people who looked at your roles and decided they’d rather do something else. You cut the layer where people learned to lead. In three years you’ll need leaders badly. The pipeline you destroyed isn’t going to refill itself in time.
Having worked with enough companies post-flattening, the patterns are clear. Strategic initiatives stall out because you don’t have the leadership depth to execute them. Operational decisions get kicked up to VPs who don’t have the bandwidth to make them thoughtfully. Institutional knowledge walks out when experienced managers leave and nobody captured what they knew. The efficiency gains look brilliant until you hit the point where you can’t grow anymore because you don’t have leaders to deploy.
You’re not optimizing for efficiency. You’re optimizing for this quarter and guaranteeing yourself a crisis in three years. Leadership development takes years of repetition and coaching. You can’t compress it into six months when you suddenly realize you need it. And you can’t hire your way out when the generation you’re trying to recruit doesn’t want what you’re offering.
The opinions expressed in Fortune.com commentary pieces are solely the views of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs of Fortune.
