There are four organizational chart types in common use and every real chart is one of them or a mix of two. Knowing which you are drawing matters more than the drawing itself, because each type answers a different question and fails in a different way. This page is one example of each, what it is good at, where it breaks, and the arithmetic that tells you whether your company can hold it. The planner gives you the two numbers that decide: the managers your span implies and the layers your headcount needs. On the worked example that is 15 managers and four layers for 120 people.
Hierarchical, and why it is still the default
One line up from every box, no exceptions, and the whole chart reads in a glance. It is the type that answers who approves this and who writes my review, which are the two questions a chart is asked most often. It breaks when real work crosses departments and the chart cannot show it, at which point people either add dotted lines or stop trusting the chart. On 120 people at a span of seven it needs 15 managers and four layers.
Functional and divisional, and the manager count between them
Functional groups everyone by discipline: one engineering group, one marketing group, one finance group. Divisional repeats those functions inside each product or region, which is what makes it expensive: two divisions of sixty people each need their own managers, so the same 120 people can imply noticeably more than 15. That cost is the argument for staying functional until a division can carry a full set of functions on its own.
Matrix and flat, and what each hides
Matrix draws the second manager, which makes it honest and busy: 43 dotted lines on a 140-person chart is 183 relationships rather than 140. Flat removes the middle layer and works only while the top can carry the span; four leaders reach 28 people in two layers, so a flat company of 90 usually means the managers exist without the titles.
Questions people ask about examples of org charts
What are the types of organizational charts?
Hierarchical, functional, divisional, matrix and flat, with most companies running a hierarchical chart with a few dotted lines on it.
Can we mix two types?
Almost everyone does. The useful discipline is that the solid line has one type, so there is always one answer to who writes the review.
Is a flat structure better?
It is cheaper in managers and harder on the top layer. The planner shows the trade directly: drop the span and the manager count rises; raise it and the layers fall but each manager carries more.