Theory Of Span Of Control

Span of control is defined as the number of people that directly report to a manager (Organizational Size and Span of Control). Using the principle of span of control proposed by Gulick (1937), Urwick (1956), and Meier and Bohte (2000) developed the theory of span of control. (Span of Control and Public Organization) This theory states that there is a specific number where span of control reaches its maximum capacity to be effective, and if you add more to this, then that adds no value or could even be damaging. For example, span of control of 5 indicate that 5 employees report to one manager. This also can be a ratio by dividing the organizational total number of non-managers by the total number of managers. For example, a unit …show more content…
Span of control also affects organizational communication, employee motivation, reporting and relationship. With a smaller or narrower span of control the managers are able to take care of the needs of employees. When there is a large or wide span of control then the managers can become overwhelmed and disorganized. This can lead to employees not feeling as if their input or report is actually being considered, and performance of the entire team is affected (Gittell).
Also, span of control can be influenced by many factors such as nature of work, complexity of work, size, experience level and environmental stability. Therefore, to succeed, nurse managers have to optimize their span of control in order to allow them time to develop relationships with their employee. The idea is to ensure the most efficiency so that a manager can handle several employees effectively but at the same time not become overloaded. The employees must be able to come to their manager with their input and the manager must be able to address all issues …show more content…
These findings depend and vary due to several characteristics or stipulations, such as the scope and scale of the work the complexity of the job and how proficient the subordinates are. It is found that four is the true maximum and that even raising the ratio to five would results in the equivalence of having twenty new relationships for the manager. To put this in another perspective, Gracicunas mentions that the result is actually not beneficial; it is more damaging to increase the ratio. Gracicunas notes, “An increase in complexity of 127 percent in return for a 20 percent increase in working capacity” (Graicuns Span of Control). Therefore, this shows that for the percentage that would result in greater working capacity, the affect is an increase in complexity and unnecessary work for the manager when increasing the ratio of