Span of control

Last updated

Span of control, also called span of management, is a term used in business management, particularly human resource management. The term refers to the number of direct reports a supervisor is responsible for (the number of people the supervisor supports).

Contents

Overview

In simple words, span of control means the manageable number of subordinates of a superior. The bigger the number of the subordinates a manager controls, the broader is her/his span of control.

In a hierarchical business organization of some time in the past [ when? ] it was not uncommon to see average spans of 1-to-4 or even less, i.e. one manager supervised four employees on average. In the 1980s corporate leaders flattened many organizational structures causing average spans to move closer to 1-to-10. That was made possible primarily by the development of inexpensive information technology. As information technology was developed capable of easing many middle manager tasks – tasks like collecting, manipulating and presenting operational information – upper managers found they could hire fewer middle managers to do more work managing more subordinates for less money.

The current shift to self-directed cross-functional teams and other forms of non-hierarchical structures, have made the concept of span of control less important.

Theories about the optimum span of control go back to V. A. Graicunas. In 1933 he used assumptions about mental capacity and attention span to develop a set of practical heuristics. Lyndall Urwick (1956) developed a theory based on geographical dispersion and the need for face to face meetings. In spite of numerous attempts since then, no convincing theories have been presented. This is because the optimum span of control depends on numerous variables including organizational structure, available technology, the functions being performed, and the competencies of the manager as well as staff. An alternative view is proposed by Elliott Jaques [1] that a manager may have up to as many immediate subordinates that they can know personally in the sense that they can assess personal effectiveness.

Factors Considerable deciding span of Control

These are the factors affecting span of control:

  1. Geographical dispersion, if the branches of a business are widely dispersed, then the manager will find it difficult to supervise each of them, as such the span of control will be smaller.
  2. Capability of employees: if employees are highly capable, need little supervision, and can be left on their own, e.g., Theory Y type of people, they need not be supervised closely as they are motivated and take initiative to work; as such, the span of control may be broader.
  3. Capability of managers, an experienced manager with good understanding of the tasks, good knowledge of the workers and good relationships with the workers, will be able to supervise more workers
  4. Value-add of the manager: a manager that is adding value by training and developing new skills in the workers will need a more narrow span of control than one who is focused only on performance management (this is the reverse of the capability of workers point above)
  5. Similarity of task: if the tasks that the subordinates are performing are similar, then the span of control can be wider, as the manager can supervise them all at the same time.
  6. Volume of other tasks: if the manager has other responsibilities, such as membership of committees, involvement in other projects, liaising with stakeholders, the number of direct reports will need to be smaller
  7. Required administrative tasks: if the manager is required to have regular face-to-face meetings, complete appraisal and development plans, discuss remuneration benefits, write job descriptions and employment contracts, explain employment policy changes, and other administrative task:, span of control may be reduced.
  8. Business process streamlining, effectiveness, and efficiency can reduce the span of control.

Theoretical considerations

The first to develop a more general theory of management was Henry Fayol, who had gathered empirical experience during his time as general manager of a coal and steel company, the Commentary-Fourchambault Company. He was the first to add a managerial perspective to the problem of organizational governance. The rationale for defining a strict hierarchy of communication channels is found in the need for vertical integration of activities, imposed by management's need for control and information.

However, exercising control over activities performed by subordinates and monitoring their communication would inflict information overload to the nodes at the upper hierarchical levels, since all communication to other branches of the organizational structure would be routed through them. In addition, a larger number of subordinates also requires supervisors to monitor a high number of interactions below their own level; information overload and span of control are positively correlated.

Graicunas (Gulick and Urwick, 1937) distinguished three types of interactions – direct single relationships, cross-relationships, and direct group relationships – each of them contributing to the total amount of interactions within the organization. According to Graicunas, the number of possible interactions can be computed in the following way. Let n be the number of subordinates reporting to a supervisor. Then, the number of relationships of direct single type the supervisor could possibly engage into is

The number of interactions between subordinates (cross relationships) that the supervisor has to monitor is

and the number of direct group relationships is

The sum of these three types of interactions is the number of potential relationships of a supervisor. Graicunas showed with these formulas that each additional subordinate increases the number of potential interactions significantly. It appears natural that no organization can afford to maintain a control structure of a dimension being required for implementing a scalar chain under the unity of command condition. Therefore, other mechanisms had to be found for dealing with the dilemma of maintaining managerial control, while keeping cost and time at a reasonable level, thus making the span of control a critical figure for the organization. Consequently, for a long time, finding the optimum span of control has been a major challenge to organization design. As Mackenzie (1978, p 121) describes it:

”One could argue that with larger spans, the costs of supervision would tend to be reduced, because a smaller percentage of the members of the organization are supervisors. On the other hand, if the span of control is too large, the supervisor may not have the capacity to supervise effectively such large numbers of immediate subordinates. Thus, there is a possible trade-off to be made in an attempt to balance these possibly opposing tendencies.”

Fayol proposed that subordinate employees should be allowed to communicate directly with each other, given that their superiors had agreed upon this procedure. This principle became known as "Fayol's Bridge."

The use of Fayol’s Bridge resulted in a number of other aspects needing to be taken into consideration. In order to put this system to work, Taylor’s functional foremanship has to be abandoned, and unity of command needs to be established. At the same time, decision power is distributed to individuals on lower levels in the organization, and only decisions that exceed the pre-defined decision scope of an employee are referred upwards. This, in turn, strengthens the co-equality of authority and responsibility. Since a Fayol Bridge is not limited to a certain functional area within the organization, but can span over functional boundaries, e.g. from purchasing to manufacturing, it can be considered as a first attempt to create a horizontal integration of related activities under a certain level of self-management, an early business process.

Mackenzie and others (Massie 1965, Pugh et al., 1972) also noted that there is no generally applicable optimum span of control. There are instead several factors influencing the balance between the desired level of control and the manageability of the organization.

Firstly, it depends on the capabilities of the organizational members, managers and workers. It was assumed, that no manager would be capable of supervising more than 5-6 direct subordinates. However, this conclusion built on the assumption that the superior must actively monitor the work of all subordinates. Later on, this statement was diversified when Davis (1951) divided managerial work into two categories, one requiring the attention to physical work, the other one requiring mental activity. Depending on the type of supervision, a span of 3-8 subordinates for managers at higher levels was considered adequate, while first level supervisors, i.e. those supervising shop floor personnel could have up to 30 subordinates.

The neoclassical theorists have developed a different solution. They assumed that a considerable amount of decisions could be delegated to organizational members at lower organizational levels. This solution would be equivalent to the application of Fayol's Bridge combined with the principle of employee initiative that he proposed. As a result, the need for supervision would be reduced from direct control to exception handling. According to this assumption, they considered the opportunity of having access to a supervising manager would be sufficient to satisfy the need for control in standard situations. Peter Drucker [2] refers to this principle as the span of managerial responsibility.

See also

Related Research Articles

Management is the administration of organizations, whether they are a business, a nonprofit organization, or a government body through business administration, nonprofit management, or the political science sub-field of public administration respectively. It is the process of managing the resources of businesses, governments, and other organizations.

Business administration is the administration of a commercial enterprise. It includes all aspects of overseeing and supervising the business operations of an organization.

Delegation is the process of distributing and entrusting work to another person. In management or leadership within an organisation, it involves a manager aiming to efficiently distribute work, decision-making and responsibility to subordinate workers in an organization. Delegation may result in creation of an accountable chain of authority where authority and responsibility moves down in an organisational structure. Inefficient delegation may lead to micromanagement.

Middle management is the intermediate management level of a hierarchical organization that is subordinate to the executive management and responsible for "team leading" line managers and/or "specialist" line managers. Middle management is indirectly responsible for junior staff performance and productivity.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Organizational theory</span> Organizational theory

Organizational theory refers to a series of interrelated concepts that involve the sociological study of the structures and operations of formal social organizations. Organizational theory also seeks to explain how interrelated units of organization either connect or do not connect with each other. Organizational theory also concerns understanding how groups of individuals behave, which may differ from the behavior of an individual. The behavior organizational theory often focuses on is goal-directed. Organizational theory covers both intra-organizational and inter-organizational fields of study.

An organizational structure defines how activities such as task allocation, coordination, and supervision are directed toward the achievement of organizational aims.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Theory X and Theory Y</span> Theories of human motivation

Theory X and Theory Y are theories of human work motivation and management. They were created by Douglas McGregor while he was working at the MIT Sloan School of Management in the 1950s, and developed further in the 1960s. McGregor's work was rooted in motivation theory alongside the works of Abraham Maslow, who created the hierarchy of needs. The two theories proposed by McGregor describe contrasting models of workforce motivation applied by managers in human resource management, organizational behavior, organizational communication and organizational development. Theory X explains the importance of heightened supervision, external rewards, and penalties, while Theory Y highlights the motivating role of job satisfaction and encourages workers to approach tasks without direct supervision. Management use of Theory X and Theory Y can affect employee motivation and productivity in different ways, and managers may choose to implement strategies from both theories into their practices.

Organizational behavior or organisational behaviour is the "study of human behavior in organizational settings, the interface between human behavior and the organization, and the organization itself". Organizational behavioral research can be categorized in at least three ways:

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Lyndall Urwick</span> British management consultant

Lyndall Fownes Urwick was a British management consultant and business thinker. He is recognised for integrating the ideas of earlier theorists like Henri Fayol into a comprehensive theory of management administration. He wrote an influential book called The Elements of Business Administration, published in 1943. With Luther Gulick, he founded the academic journal Administrative Science Quarterly.

Organizing or organising is the establishment of effective authority-relationships among selected works, which often improves efficiency.

Management consists of the planning, prioritizing, and organizing work efforts to accomplish objectives within a business organization. A management style is the particular way managers go about accomplishing these objectives. It encompasses the way they make decisions, how they plan and organize work, and how they exercise authority.

The leader–member exchange (LMX) theory is a relationship-based approach to leadership that focuses on the two-way (dyadic) relationship between leaders and followers.

Control is a function of management that helps to check errors and take corrective actions. This is done to minimize deviation from standards and ensure that the stated goals of the organization are achieved in a desired manner.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Henri Fayol</span> French mining engineer and executive, developer of "Fayolism"

Henri Fayol was a French mining engineer, mining executive, author and director of mines who developed a general theory of business administration that is often called Fayolism. He and his colleagues developed this theory independently of scientific management but roughly contemporaneously. Like his contemporary Frederick Winslow Taylor, he is widely acknowledged as a founder of modern management methods.

Workplace deviance, in group psychology, may be described as the deliberate desire to cause harm to an organization – more specifically, a workplace. The concept has become an instrumental component in the field of organizational communication. More accurately, it can be seen as "voluntary behavior that violates institutionalized norms and in doing so threatens the well-being of the organization".

POSDCORB is an acronym widely used in the field of management and public administration that reflects the classic view of organizational theory. It appeared most prominently in a 1937 paper by Luther Gulick. However, he first presented the concept in 1935. Initially, POSDCORB was envisioned in an effort to develop public service professionals. In Gulick's own words, the elements are as follows: Planning, Organizing, Staffing, Directing, Co-Ordinating, Reporting and Budgeting.

Professional abuse is "a pattern of conduct in which a person abuses, violates, or takes advantage of a victim within the context of the abuser's profession." This typically involves a violation of the relevant professional organization's code of ethics. Organizational ethics or standards of behavior require the maintenance of professional boundaries and the treatment of people with respect and dignity.

Likert's management systems are management styles developed by Rensis Likert in the 1960s. He outlined four systems of management to describe the relationship, involvement, and roles of managers and subordinates in industrial settings. He based the systems on studies of highly productive supervisors and their team members of an American Insurance Company. Later, he and Jane G. Likert revised the systems to apply to educational settings. They initially intended to spell out the roles of principals, students, and teachers; eventually others such as superintendents, administrators, and parents were included. The management systems, established by Likert, include "Exploitative Authoritative, Benevolent Authoritative, Consultative, and Participative ."

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Fayolism</span> Management theory developed by Henri Fayol

Fayolism was a theory of management that analyzed and synthesized the role of management in organizations, developed around 1900 by the French manager and management theorist Henri Fayol (1841–1925). It was through Fayol's work as a philosopher of administration that he contributed most widely to the theory and practice of organizational management.

Machiavellianism in the workplace is a concept studied by many organizational psychologists. Conceptualized originally by Richard Christie and Florence Geis, Machiavellianism refers to a psychological trait construct where individuals behave in a cold and duplicitous manner. It has been adapted and applied to the context of the workplace and organizations by psychology academics.

References

Literature