Spans and layers

The Human Resources military-industrial complex →Go uptown The instrument (the “telescreen”, it was called) could be dimmed, but there was no way of shutting it off completely. Index: Click ᐅ to expand: HR Tell me more Sign up for our newsletter — or just get in touch: for ½ a weekly 🍺 you get to consult JC. Ask about it here.

There is much management theory around the relationship of “spans” and “layers” in the optimal organisation. There should be no more than 5 “layers” of hierarchy in an organisation, and each manager in that organisation should “span” no more than 5 direct reports.

Why? Apparently, To make performance appraisal easier.

This, from People Puzzles, is pretty funny:

How many is too many?
Around five direct reports seems to be the optimum number, according to Mark and Alison, although there are some scenarios where up to nine can work.
When it comes to the senior team in a company, however, too many people reporting directly to the owner manager can really hold the business back. Alison recalls working with someone who had 13 people reporting directly to her. “She had to do 13 appraisals at the end of every year!” she says. “It simply wasn’t an effective use of her time.”

To wit: a worldview in which the most significant thing you can do is manage, and the most significant part of management is performance appraisal.

The theory: look after the form and the substance will look after itself. Look after the pounds and hope the pennies take care of themselves. But of course they will: that’s what pennies do: they need no licence from the boss for that.

Counter-theory, therefore: performance comes despite management, not because of it.