Capability of workers, if workers are highly capable, need little supervision, and can be left on their own, e. That was made possible primarily by the development of inexpensive Span of control at apple inc organizational structure technology.
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.
However, exercising control over activities performed by subordinates and monitoring their communication, the nodes at the upper hierarchical levels would be suffering from information overload, since all communication to other branches of the organizational structure would be routed through them.
According to Graicunas, the number of possible interactions can be computed in the following way.
Overview[ edit ] In the hierarchical business organization of some time in the past it was not uncommon to see average spans of 1-to-4 or even less. Capability of boss, an experienced boss with good understanding of the tasks, good knowledge of the workers and good relationships with the workers, will be able to supervise more workers Value-add of the boss, a boss that is adding value by training and developing new skills in the workers will need a narrow span of control than one who is focused only on performance management this is the reverse of the capability of workers point above 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.
Theories about the optimum span of control go back to V. In he used assumptions about mental capacity and attention span to develop a set of practical heuristics. Then, the number of relationships of direct single type the supervisor could possibly engage into is n.
He was first to add a managerial perspective to the problem of organizational governance. Graicunas Gulick and Urwickdistinguished 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.
That is, one manager supervised four employees on average. Theory Y type of people, they need not be supervised much as they are motivated and take initiative to work; as such the span of control will be wider.
Let n be the number of subordinates reporting to a supervisor. 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.
In the s corporate leaders flattened many organizational structures causing average spans to move closer to 1-to Lyndall Urwick developed a theory based on geographical dispersion and the need for face to face meetings.
Factors affecting span of control[ edit ] These are the factors affecting span of control: 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.
An alternative view is proposed by Elliott Jaques 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. Volume of other tasks, if the boss 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 Required administrative tasks, if the boss 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 tasks then the span of control is reduced Theoretical considerations[ edit ] The first to develop a more general theory of management was Henri Fayolwho had gathered empirical experience during his time as general manager of a coal and steel company, the Commentary-Fourchambault Company.
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. In spite of numerous attempts since then, no convincing theories have been presented.For more on Apple, watch this Fortune video: Simplicity also is key to Apple’s organizational structure.
The org chart (see next page) is deceptively straightforward, with none of the dotted. Organizational Culture at Apple Inc Introduction Apple Inc. is a global computer manufacturing company that is going through majo r changes in its organizational culture and it’s organizational structure due to several events of the past few years.
The Organizational Structure of Apple Inc Characteristics of Apple's Structure Wider span of control and higher unity of command More equal?
Mechanistic Structure Characteristics of Apple‘s organizational structure Mechanistic structure in Apple Conclusion. This recent article suggests that Tim's span of control is growing and might now be too wide?
tutor2u. Subjects Events Job board Shop Company Support Main menu. Cart. Apple - Is Tim Cook's Span of Control Getting Too Wide?
Jim Riley 11 th July Print page. Span of Control (Organisational Structure) Student videos. Organisational.
If Apple is serious about services, then Cook’s promise that Apple would stay “extremely focused” is an empty one, and the insistence on a single type of organizational structure changes from enhancing Apple’s quality to actively detracting.
6. -Tall organizational structure.
Police officers Example: Apple inc. Pros: More efficient and organized.-Supervisors can spend more time on individuals.-Easier to develop group cohesiveness within the smaller group of employees Span of Management/Control Two types of Span of control.Download