SPAN OF CONTROL
Span of control is also known as span of management, is a human resources management term that refers to the number of subordinates a supervisor can effectively manage. It is important concept for small business owners to understand.
"Span of control is widely taught in management schools and widely employed in large organizations like the military, government agencies, and educational institutions," Mark Hendricks wrote in an article for Entrepreneur. When a small business proprietor span of control becomes too large, it can limit the growth of his or her company. Even the best managers tend to lose their effectiveness when they spend all their time managing people and their issues and are unable to focus on long-term plans positioning for the business as a whole.So its very much needed in upcoming organisation.
The concept of span of control was developed in UK in 1922 by Sir Ian Hamilton. It arose from the assumption that managers have finite amounts of time, energy, and attention to devote to their jobs. In studies of British military leaders, Hamilton found that they could not effectively control more than three to six people directly. It followas the "rule of thumb" for span of control ever since. More than a decade later, A.V. Graicumas illustrated the concept of span of control mathematically. His research showed that the number of interactions between managers and their subordinates—and thus the amount of time managers spent on supervision—increased geometrically as the managers' span of control became larger. For example, as George P. Hattrup and Brian H. Kleiner noted in Industrial Management, the addition of a fifth subordinate under one manager raises the manager's potential interactions from 44 to 100, while the addition of an eighth subordinate increases the potential interactions from 490 to 1,080. At some point, the demands of these interactions with subordinates creates serious problems for the manager.
The concept of span of control was developed in UK in 1922 by Sir Ian Hamilton. It arose from the assumption that managers have finite amounts of time, energy, and attention to devote to their jobs. In studies of British military leaders, Hamilton found that they could not effectively control more than three to six people directly. It followas the "rule of thumb" for span of control ever since. More than a decade later, A.V. Graicumas illustrated the concept of span of control mathematically. His research showed that the number of interactions between managers and their subordinates—and thus the amount of time managers spent on supervision—increased geometrically as the managers' span of control became larger. For example, as George P. Hattrup and Brian H. Kleiner noted in Industrial Management, the addition of a fifth subordinate under one manager raises the manager's potential interactions from 44 to 100, while the addition of an eighth subordinate increases the potential interactions from 490 to 1,080. At some point, the demands of these interactions with subordinates creates serious problems for the manager.
It is crucial to note that all managers experience a decrease in effectiveness as their span of control exceeds the optimal level. The limitations implied by span of control are not short-comings of certain individual managers but rather of managers in general. In addition, it is important to understand that span of control refers only to direct reports, rather than to an entire corporate hierarchy. Even though a CEO may technically control hundreds of employees, his or her span of control would only include the department heads or functional managers who reported to the CEO directly. "When given enough levels of hierarchy, any manager can control any number of people—albeit indirectly," Hendricks noted. Entrepreneurs and small business owners are particularly susceptible to overextending their span of control. After all, many of these people have started a business from the ground up and are worry of losing control over its operations. They thus choose to manage lots of people directly, rather than delegating tasks to middle managers, in an effort to continue being involved in key decisions as the business grows. But this strategy can backfire, as Hendricks explained: "Extending span of control beyond the recommended limits engenders poor morale, hinders effective decision making, and may cause loss.Thus one can say that span of control is essential in on firm to uplift its position in market and to meet the requirement of managements needs.
No comments:
Post a Comment