PayPal is in the middle of a significant turnaround that includes simplifying its operating model, reducing organisational layers, improving productivity and modernising its technology infrastructure. According to Reuters, the company expects the first phase of this programme to deliver around $400 million in cost savings by the end of 2026, while a broader set of measures announced earlier this year is expected to generate approximately $1.5 billion in savings over the following two to three years. PayPal has also identified duplication across workforce layers as an area for improvement, with AI expected to play a role in streamlining parts of the operation. (reuters.com)
The immediate objective is to improve PayPal’s performance in an increasingly competitive payments market, but the changes also raise a broader management question that applies to organisations far beyond financial technology. As organisations grow, they tend to accumulate additional management layers, specialist teams, controls, systems and approval mechanisms. Many of these additions are reasonable when introduced, but the combined effect can eventually make the organisation slower, more expensive and harder to manage. At that point, organisational complexity stops being a natural consequence of growth and becomes a performance problem in its own right.
Complexity Usually Accumulates Rather Than Being Designed
Very few organisations deliberately set out to become complicated. Complexity generally develops gradually as the organisation responds to new requirements. A management layer may be added to improve oversight, another approval may be introduced after a control failure, a specialist team may be created to solve a specific problem, or a new system may be implemented without fully replacing an older one. Each decision may be sensible in isolation, but organisations do not always return later to assess whether all of those additions are still necessary.
Over time, this can create processes that require more coordination than the work itself justifies. A relatively simple decision may need input from several managers, multiple functions may maintain similar information, and routine activities may pass through several handoffs before they are completed. The individual elements of the structure may all have a rationale, but the overall operating model can still become inefficient because no one has reviewed the cumulative burden created by those decisions.
This is one reason PayPal’s decision to reduce organisational layers is particularly relevant from an Operational Excellence perspective. The issue is not simply whether the company employs too many managers. The more important question is whether each layer, role and control contributes enough value to justify the additional coordination, delay and cost that it introduces into the operation.
More Management Does Not Automatically Create Better Control
Large organisations need management structures, accountability and oversight, and reducing layers indiscriminately can create its own problems. However, additional management only improves performance when it contributes to better decisions, clearer accountability or more effective coordination. When layers mainly exist to pass information upwards, approve routine decisions or compensate for unclear responsibilities, they can make the organisation slower without making it better controlled.
This distinction is important because organisations often confuse the presence of control with the quality of control. A process requiring five approvals is not necessarily safer or better governed than one requiring two. The additional approvals may address legitimate risks, but they may also have accumulated because responsibilities are unclear or because controls were added after individual incidents and never reviewed again. In such cases, the organisation can end up managing risk through complexity rather than through good process design.
Operational Excellence takes a different approach by asking what control is actually required, where it should sit in the process and who should be responsible for it. The objective is not to remove oversight, but to design oversight in a way that supports the process rather than obstructing it. This often means moving appropriate decisions closer to the people performing the work while retaining stronger controls where the consequences of failure genuinely justify them.
Duplication Is Often a Structural Problem
PayPal has also identified duplication across workforce layers as an area it intends to address. (reuters.com) Duplication is a common source of organisational waste because it is often spread across several parts of the business and therefore difficult to see as a single problem. Two teams may collect similar data for different reports, several managers may review the same issue, or multiple functions may maintain separate versions of information because their systems and responsibilities have developed independently.
The cost of this duplication is not limited to additional labour. It also increases the number of interactions needed to complete work, which creates more opportunities for delays, errors and misunderstandings. Employees spend time reconciling information, preparing similar reports for different audiences and attending meetings that exist largely because ownership is fragmented across the organisation.
Process improvement is useful in this situation because it asks a more fundamental question than how an activity can be performed faster. It asks whether the activity should exist at all. Improving the efficiency of an unnecessary report, approval or handoff produces less value than eliminating the need for it. This is why genuine simplification usually requires organisations to redesign processes rather than simply reduce headcount.
Simplification Is Not the Same as Cost Cutting
This distinction is particularly important when organisations undertake restructuring programmes. A company can reduce costs quickly by removing positions, but that does not necessarily make the operation simpler. If the same processes, controls, meetings and reporting requirements remain after people are removed, the remaining employees may simply inherit a larger workload. The financial cost falls, but the underlying complexity remains.
Effective simplification works differently. It begins by understanding how the work is performed and identifying which activities, handoffs, controls and responsibilities are genuinely necessary. Only after that should the organisation decide how much capacity is required to operate the redesigned process. This sequence matters because removing resources before removing unnecessary work can damage service quality, increase workload and create new operational risks.
The same principle applies to PayPal’s technology modernisation. Reuters reports that the company is combining organisational simplification with a broader programme of technology and AI integration through 2029. (reuters.com) Technology can support a simpler operating model by reducing manual work and improving information flow, but it can also preserve complexity if existing processes are automated without first being reconsidered. Automating an unnecessary approval or duplicated activity may reduce the effort required to perform it, but it does not address why the activity exists.
Organisations Are Vertical, but Processes Are Horizontal
One of the main reasons organisational complexity becomes difficult to manage is that organisations are usually structured vertically while most important work happens horizontally. Functions such as finance, technology, marketing, operations and customer service have their own leaders, measures and responsibilities, but many of the outcomes customers care about require several of these functions to work together.
A payment transaction, customer complaint, product launch or account onboarding process may cross multiple organisational boundaries before it is completed. Problems often arise at those boundaries because each function is designed to optimise its own work rather than the overall process. One team can therefore perform well according to its own measures while the end to end process remains slow or unreliable.
This is a core concern of Operational Excellence. Improving performance requires organisations to understand processes from beginning to end rather than treating each function as an isolated unit. Clear process ownership, defined responsibilities and shared measures can reduce the amount of management intervention required because fewer issues need to be resolved through escalation or coordination between departments.
The implication is that organisational simplification should not be limited to removing boxes from an organisational chart. It should also reduce the number of unnecessary interfaces between those boxes. In many cases, the most important gains come from simplifying how work moves across the organisation rather than from changing the number of people within any one function.
The Cost of Complexity Is Broader Than Overhead
The most visible cost of organisational complexity is overhead, but the operational impact is often more important. Every additional handoff, approval and coordination point increases the amount of effort required to produce the same outcome. Decision making becomes slower because more people need to be consulted, information can be distorted as it moves through multiple levels, and ownership becomes less clear when several teams are involved in the same activity.
Complexity also makes continuous improvement more difficult. When no one owns an end to end process, individual teams tend to improve the parts they control rather than the overall outcome. This can create local efficiencies while leaving the organisation as a whole no better off. A function may reduce its own processing time, for example, while creating additional work for the next stage of the process.
As organisations grow, some additional complexity is unavoidable. New products, markets, regulations and technologies create legitimate requirements that need to be managed. The objective should therefore not be to eliminate complexity completely, but to distinguish between complexity that is necessary and complexity that has simply accumulated over time.
What Other Organisations Can Learn From PayPal
PayPal’s turnaround is still in progress, so it is too early to judge the long term success of its restructuring. However, the broader management lesson is already relevant. Organisations should periodically review whether the structures, approvals, controls and processes they have accumulated are still necessary and whether they continue to support the way the organisation now operates. (reuters.com)
This requires looking beyond the organisational chart. Leaders should understand how many people are involved in routine decisions, how often work moves between teams, where duplicate activities exist, whether responsibilities are clear and how much effort is spent coordinating work rather than performing it. They should also distinguish carefully between controls that genuinely manage risk and controls that remain only because they have become part of the established process.
PayPal’s current programme is a useful example because it treats simplification as part of a wider operating model change rather than as a single cost reduction exercise. The company is addressing workforce layers, technology, productivity and duplication together, which reflects the reality that organisational performance depends on how these elements interact.
Operational Excellence is fundamentally concerned with that interaction. Organisations continuously add new systems, roles, controls and capabilities as they grow, but they are often less disciplined about removing what is no longer needed. Over time, that imbalance creates complexity that consumes resources and slows performance. The better approach is to treat simplification as a continuous management responsibility rather than something that is addressed only when financial pressure forces a restructuring.
Primary news source: Reuters, PayPal presses on with turnaround in pivotal quarter as sale questions linger, published 28 July 2026.
Leave a Reply