Administrative theorists concluded many decades ago that the most effective organizations have a narrow span of control. Yet today’s top-performing manufacturing firms have a wide span of control. Why is this possible? Under what circumstances, if any, should manufacturing firms have a narrow span of control?
There are at least two reasons why many organizations are moving toward flatter organizational structures with a wider span of control.
First, flatter structures require less overhead -- there are fewer middle managers and more people directly involved in the production of goods and/or services.
Second, flatter structures are consistent with the trend toward greater autonomy and employee involvement. Managers necessarily have a wide span of control in flatter structures, and they are unable to engage in close supervision. Instead, employees (and work teams) are given more freedom to make decisions without management review.
A narrow span or control would be most appropriate with a workforce that is low skilled and made up of workers with a high power distance. In such cases, the close supervision and control would be less likely to be viewed as a lack of trust among workers.
First, flatter structures require less overhead -- there are fewer middle managers and more people directly involved in the production of goods and/or services.
Second, flatter structures are consistent with the trend toward greater autonomy and employee involvement. Managers necessarily have a wide span of control in flatter structures, and they are unable to engage in close supervision. Instead, employees (and work teams) are given more freedom to make decisions without management review.
A narrow span or control would be most appropriate with a workforce that is low skilled and made up of workers with a high power distance. In such cases, the close supervision and control would be less likely to be viewed as a lack of trust among workers.
Comments
Post a Comment