Understanding Organisational Structure: Lessons from Maruti Suzuki for Toyota North America

In today’s global automotive industry, organisational structure isn’t simply a matter of hierarchy and reporting lines—it can shape responsiveness, innovation, cost efficiency and cross-functional collaboration. For an operation like Toyota’s North American arm, TMNA, examining how peer companies manage their structure can provide valuable insight. One interesting reference point is the Maruti Suzuki org chart—that of India’s dominant passenger-car manufacturer. Though Maruti operates in a very different geography and market context, exploring its structure can spark meaningful comparisons and reflections for Toyota’s operations in North America.

The Maruti Suzuki Org Chart: An Overview

Let’s first sketch out what we know about Maruti Suzuki’s organisational set-up:

• According to available studies, Maruti Suzuki uses a functional structure with horizontal linkages. Its activities are divided into functions such as marketing, finance, engineering & sales, production, spares, quality assurance, HR development, IT, etc. 

• The company reportedly has a multi‐level management structure: for instance, one analysis notes six functional levels (Workers & Technicians → Supervisors → Executives → Section Managers → Department Manager → Division Manager) before reaching the Director level.

  
  

• One estimate indicates Maruti has about 29 divisions and 132 departments under those divisional heads. 

• Decision-making authority is described as somewhat decentralised, and the structure is characterised by a high degree of formalisation in procedures and workflow. 

• The org-chart also shows that the company emphasises clear functional departments and a relatively flat hierarchy compared to extremely layered organisations.

From this we can see that the term “Maruti Suzuki org chart” refers not to one single diagram, but a broad snapshot of how the company organises work across functions and levels.

Why This Matters for Toyota North America

Although TMNA operates in a very different market (North America vs. India), there are structural and strategic parallels worth noting.

1. Complexity & Scale

TMNA is the North American arm of the global Toyota Motor Corporation, managing manufacturing, engineering, sales, marketing, after-sales and corporate functions across the U.S., Canada and Mexico. 
In such a setting, how functions are organised, how decisions flow, and how divisions collaborate becomes critically important. Looking at a large company like Maruti—operating tens of divisions and hundreds of departments—can provide useful benchmarks for handling complexity.

2. Functional Structure vs. Divisional Emphasis

Maruti’s use of a functional structure (with well-defined departments for production, marketing, finance, etc.) suggests strength in clarity of roles and formalised processes. For TMNA, balancing functional excellence (engineering, quality, manufacturing) with regional/divisional agility is key.
One practical insight: when major functions are clearly delineated, companies can achieve consistent standards across plants or markets—but they must still ensure that these functions don’t become silos. Maruti seems aware of this by emphasising horizontal linkages. 

3. Decentralised Decision-Making

Maruti’s structure is described as having “low centralisation of power” and a level of decentralisation in decision-making.
For TMNA, especially with multiple manufacturing sites, R&D hubs, regional marketing teams, and evolving mobility-technology units, decentralisation (to the right level) allows faster responsiveness to local market shifts (for example, changes in U.S., Canadian or Mexican demand, regulatory shifts, supply-chain disruptions). The key is setting clear guardrails so decentralisation does not lead to fragmentation.

4. Formalisation & Standardisation

Despite decentralisation, Maruti emphasises formalised procedures, workflow documentation and departmental methods. 
For a company like TMNA—where quality, safety, and regulatory compliance are paramount—having strong formalisation (especially in manufacturing and supply chain) is essential. Yet this must be balanced with innovation speed and flexibility (for example, when deploying new mobility technologies or adapting to semiconductor supply constraints).

5. Cross-Learning Opportunities

By studying how Maruti layers divisional heads, departmental heads, and functional managers, TMNA can reflect on its own structure: Are reporting lines optimised? Are there too many layers that slow decision-making? Or is there sufficient clarity to ensure accountability?
For example, Maruti’s six broad levels upstream of the director indicate a relatively lean but still layered structure.  TMNA can benchmark: how many layers of management does it have before reaching senior leadership? Could streamlining lead to faster innovation?

Practical Tips for Corporate Leaders at TMNA

Drawing insights from the Maruti Suzuki org chart and structure, here are some practical considerations TMNA leadership might reflect on:

A. Map and Audit Reporting Layers

• Conduct an audit of how many management layers exist in each major function (manufacturing, engineering, sales, marketing, after-sales) at TMNA.

• Ask: Are there any bottlenecks caused by “too many” layers? Conversely, is accountability also clear and reachable?

• Consider whether a more “flat” structure (fewer levels) could improve speed in key decision domains (e.g., new mobility initiatives) without sacrificing control.

B. Reinforce Horizontal Collaboration Across Functions

• Even in a functionally organised company, the more fluid the linkages between manufacturing, engineering, marketing and sales, the better the responsiveness to market shifts.

• Adapt a “horizontal linkage” mindset: e.g., when a new vehicle technology is introduced, involve manufacturing early, supplier network functions early, and marketing earlier—so that time-to-market shrinks.

C. Balance Formalisation with Flexibility

• Use standard operating procedures, quality frameworks and formal workflows (as Maruti does) especially in manufacturing, supply chain and compliance.

• At the same time, ensure there are “fast paths” or agile pods for projects such as EV/HEV development, digital mobility services or software updates, where processes need to move faster than the traditional structure allows.

D. Delegate Decision Authority Where Appropriate

• Explore which decisions can be moved closer to the execution level (for example, at the plant or regional marketing team) instead of always being escalated to headquarters. Maruti’s low centralization model suggests that this can lead to quicker responses.

• Set clear boundaries: define which decisions must stay at corporate level (e.g., major investment approvals, global platform strategy) vs. those that can be delegated.

E. Monitor Span of Control and Division of Responsibility

• Review how many departments and functions each divisional or managing officer oversees (Maruti had 29 divisions and 132 departments in one study). 

• Look for signs of overload (one manager overseeing too many units) or silos (units that rarely communicate with others). For TMNA this could mean mapping out span of control per senior executive and identifying opportunities for better distribution.

Strategic Considerations for the Future

As TMNA evolves in a fast-changing automotive environment (electrification, software, mobility services, supply chain disruptions), the relevance of organisational structure becomes even more critical. Some strategic considerations:

• Mobility/Software Unit Integration: Traditional car companies are increasingly becoming mobility companies. If TMNA sets up new business units (e.g., connected services, in-vehicle software, battery manufacturing), should these be embedded in existing functions or operate as separate entities? Examining how Maruti’s “new business” function is embedded may offer a model. 

• Regional vs Headquarters Balance: In a continent-wide operation like North America, local responsiveness (Canada/Mexico/U.S.) matters. TMNA may consider regional hubs with decision authority, informed by the decentralised decision-making model of Maruti.

• Cross-Plant Manufacturing Alignment: With TMNA operating multiple manufacturing sites across different states (and cross-border with Mexico and Canada)  aligning manufacturing functions and ensuring consistent processes is key. A strong functional backbone (as in Maruti’s production–inspection–material functions) is essential—but so is inter-plant coordination and knowledge sharing.

• Talent & Leadership Pipelines: When companies have clear levels (e.g., Maruti’s worker/technician → supervisor → executive → manager → division manager sequence) the pathways for promotion, role clarity and career growth become visible. TMNA should ensure leadership paths are clear for functions like IT/digital, engineering, manufacturing and supply chain to attract and retain talent.

Conclusion

Understanding organisational structure is far from a dry, internal-only concern—it is a strategic lever that shapes culture, agility, decision speed and competitive positioning. By turning the lens to the “Maruti Suzuki org chart”, we can glean practical insights that are relevant for a major organisation like Toyota Motor North America. The layers of hierarchy, the functional divisions, the decentralisation of decision-making, and the balance between formalisation and flexibility all provide food for thought.

For TMNA, the real work lies in adapting these structural insights to its own scale, market environment and strategic priorities: enabling faster innovation, supporting complex manufacturing across borders, integrating digital mobility services, and maintaining Toyota’s hallmark reliability and quality. The structure you operate under is not just how you organise—it influences how you compete.

FAQ — Common Questions About the Maruti Suzuki Org Chart

Q1: What does the “Maruti Suzuki org chart” typically show?
A1: It typically displays how the company is structured by function (such as production, sales, marketing, finance, HR, engineering) and by level (from technicians/workers up through supervisors, executives, managers, divisional heads and directors).

Q2: Why is the Maruti Suzuki organisational structure described as “low centralisation”?
A2: According to analyses, Maruti delegates decision-making authority across levels rather than concentrating it solely at top leadership, enabling more responsiveness at departmental or divisional levels. 

Q3: How many divisions and departments does Maruti Suzuki reportedly have?
A3: One study suggests Maruti has about 29 divisions, and within those divisions around 132 departments, each headed by departmental heads, under divisional management. 

Q4: How might a company like Toyota North America use insights from the Maruti Suzuki org chart?
A4: TMNA can review its own structure in light of Maruti’s functional clarity, decentralised decision-making, and horizontal collaboration. Specifically: check for excessive layers, empower regional teams, formalise functional operations while maintaining agility, and clarify career pathways in leadership. (As described in the article above.)

Q5: Is the Maruti Suzuki org chart publicly available in full detail?
A5: Not entirely. While some leadership team information and broad structural descriptions are publicly accessible, full internal charts (with all divisions, managers and reporting lines) are generally considered internal documents. For example, one study noted that the organisation chart is “an internal company document and cannot be shared with people outside the organisation.”