May 1, 2026 l BusinessWorld
We’ve been watching something quietly unfold across organizations, and it’s not getting enough honest conversation. The middle manager — the layer that once held companies together — is slowly being squeezed out.
For years, we built organizations like pyramids. At the top, strategy. At the bottom, execution. In the middle, managers translating vision into action. That middle layer used to be indispensable. Today, it’s under pressure from both sides.
Technology is one reason. Artificial intelligence (AI) is now doing what middle managers used to spend hours on, such as tracking performance, assigning tasks, analyzing reports, even drafting decisions. A global survey shows that 78% of executives expect AI to significantly reduce middle management roles. Gartner goes further, predicting that many organizations could eliminate more than half of these roles as they adopt AI-driven structures. That’s not a slow shift. That’s structural.
You see it in hiring data. Job postings for middle managers have dropped by more than 40% since 2022. In some labor market analyses, managerial roles themselves have declined while layoffs hit middle managers disproportionately harder than before. This isn’t a temporary adjustment. It’s a redesign of how organizations work.
At the same time, companies are flattening. Fewer layers. Wider spans of control. One manager now handles what three used to. In fact, the number of employees per manager has doubled in recent years in some firms. I’ve seen this firsthand in conversations with leaders. They don’t want bureaucracy. They want speed.
Look at global examples. Tech giants are aggressively restructuring. Meta Platforms is pushing toward lean, AI-native teams, cutting layers and expecting employees to work more directly with systems instead of through managers. Companies like Amazon, Google, and TCS are also thinning mid-level roles to improve efficiency and decision speed. Even leaders like Jack Dorsey openly say AI could take over much of what middle managers do.
But here’s where it gets more interesting. This isn’t just about cost cutting. It’s about removing friction.
Middle managers historically acted as filters. They translated strategy into tasks. They managed approvals. They coordinated across teams. One former HR leader described their role as deciding “what is noise and what is not.” That filtering used to be necessary because information moved slowly. Today, information flows instantly. Dashboards replace reports. AI summarizes performance. Collaboration tools remove the need for constant supervision.
So the question becomes uncomfortable. If information is direct and systems are intelligent, what is left for the middle manager?
Now bring this closer to home. In the Philippines, many organizations still carry legacy structures, i.e., multiple layers, heavy approvals, long decision cycles. I see this especially in banks, government agencies, and large conglomerates. These layers were built for control and risk management. But they are now slowing down execution.
As digital transformation accelerates, these same organizations are under pressure to move faster. Customers expect real-time service. Competitors — especially fintech and digital-native players — operate with lean teams. The result is predictable. Philippine firms are beginning to flatten, whether they admit it or not.
In one bank I worked with, teams used to escalate decisions through three levels. Today, squads are empowered to decide within a sprint. In another organization, reporting layers were reduced after automation replaced manual tracking. The middle manager didn’t disappear overnight, but the role changed. Less coordination. More accountability for outcomes.
And that’s the real shift. The role is not just disappearing. It is being forced to evolve.
The danger is when organizations remove the layer without replacing the capability. Because here’s the truth many leaders miss. Middle managers were not just administrators. They were culture carriers. They coached people. They resolved conflicts. They built future leaders.
When you remove that layer too quickly, things break. In fact, research shows that when middle managers are cut, a significant portion of employees feel directionless. I’ve seen this happen. Teams move faster at first, then slowly lose alignment. Execution becomes uneven. Accountability gets blurred.
So this is not a simple story of replacement. It’s a story of redesign.
The middle manager of the past focused on control, reporting, and supervision. The middle manager of the future will need to focus on judgment, coaching, and decision making. Less about managing tasks. More about enabling people.
In practical terms, that means three things. First, becoming deeply comfortable with AI and data. If a manager cannot work with AI tools, they will be replaced by someone who can. Second, shifting from command-and-control to coaching. Teams today don’t need more instructions. They need clarity and support. Third, owning outcomes, not processes. The new expectation is simple, that is to deliver results, not reports.
For Philippine organizations, this transition is critical. We are at an inflection point. We can either hold on to outdated structures or redesign roles before disruption forces it on us.
I don’t believe the middle manager will disappear completely. But I do believe the old version is already fading. What replaces it will be fewer in number, broader in scope, and far more accountable.
The question is no longer whether the role will change. It already is.
The real question is whether today’s middle managers are ready to become something else before the organization decides for them.
***The views expressed herein are his own and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of his office as well as FINEX. For comments, email rey.lugtu@hungryworkhorse.com. Photo is from Pinterest.