In library school, in certain classes especially (scarf woman and the suspender'ed, bearded wonder), we were told that as librarians, we were entering management positions. We needed to make sure that our "underlings" understood their new position. Organization charts are our friends because they would tell us who and how to rule. I have found, within about four hours of my new job that organization charts are really just for the administration to feel as though the library has some order.
In small libraries, like my library, I think organization charts are difficult to construct because each worker wears so many hats. My main job deals with the databases and website, but I also do instruction, reference, circulation, IT trouble-shooting, collection development, and programming (as much programming as there is in an academic library). For some of these different duties, I am the "expert". For others, I answer to another librarian. It really just depends on what the task is. The same is true of the library staff: our cataloger (who doesn't have a library degree) does collection development. Our circulation person does ILL. Where would each of these workers fall on an organization chart?
I need to keep in mind that each person wears multiple hats, so when a cataloger questions my collection development decisions, she is not questioning me as the cataloger, but as my fellow collection developer. Library school was wrong: yes, technically, librarians should be in charge, but that is not actually how it works out in my library.