Or Any Other Supervisors?

ONE OF OUR READERS SENT A CURIOUS EMAIL the other day and asked me to share it with you because he is looking  for some feedback on it.  He asks:

 I have been looking on the internet everywhere for information regarding the pros and cons of a single rank structure department. I am unable to find anything. My department is looking at going to this type of rank structure and I am not real excited about it. Currently we have Lt. and Capt. and I would prefer that we keep it that way. I was wondering if you had any information regarding this subject or if you would be willing to post something to your site so that I could get people's opinions. Any help is greatly appreciated.

Personally I have never heard of such a thing, have you?  My first thought was to wonder what this department thinks supervisors are supposed to do, and how can they function effectively without layers of responsibility.  My guess is that they are looking for a gimmick to reduce wages as a budget-cutter, but that would lead to new problems eventually.

Let's look at the basic reason for having supervisors in the first place.  As soon as you have at least two people assigned to perform a task, one of them has to be a decision-maker and be responsible for the outcome of the work.  And with responsibility comes the expectation of greater rewards (wages) for having more than the people who are only doing the work.  If you have several groups of people, each with a leader, doing several separate tasks, then the group leaders need to have somebody responsible for their work.  A division leader, if you will. 

Now just how many supervisors do you need?  The short but not definitive answer is, it depends on what you are doing, and  that brings us to the managerial concept known as "span of control."  In other words, how many people can one supervisor effectively supervise is determined by what kind of work is being accomplished.  A supervisor over an office typing pool can watch over and make assignments for 20 or more typists clacking out emails and letters.  On the other hand, a bomb disposal squad might need a super for every two technicians who are a breath away from cashing it all in.

It is an axiom of managerial theory that in the fire department the span of control is five subordinates.  Taking in to account just about all of the things that need to be done in firefighting tasks, one officer can be expected to oversee and be responsible for about five firefighters.  So each engine company has an officer who makes more money than the firefighters, because he has more responsibility on his shoulders plus the added work of preparing reports on their actions, etc.  Now if you add a ladder co. in your station, the size of your workforce increases to 8 or more, beyond the accepted span of control.  So the solution is to assign another officer to lead the ladder crew.  Now you have two work groups and two leaders.  Who is responsible for them?  The normal practice is to give one of the officers that additional responsibility of overseeing the other officer and we do that my giving one of them higher wages and a higher-level title, such as "captain." 

Has the captain's span of control jumped to eight firefighters?  No, he over sees the other three on his engine and the ladder officer for a total of four.  And the progression goes on up depending on the size of the department.  Somebody has to be in charge of the station captains, such as a battalion or deputy chief.  And in a properly organized department there will be one of those chief officers overseeing 5 or 6 stations.  Key words here are "properly organized."  There are probably some loopy city/county managers out there who want to re-invent the wheel and change our span of control to 10 or more, but that will lead to a real mess, both on the fireground and in the firehouse.

You probably already know all of that, but are not used to thinking about it in those terms.  It brings me back to this request for information about a so-called single-rank structure.  Just how can that work efficiently?  An officer will not be responsible for another who is of equal rank and pay, not without conflicts and consequences.   So I'm tossing this out to you now: 

Do any of you have any experience with a single-rank structure department?  Or heard of such a thing?  Even if you haven't, tell us your opinion on this concept by either sharing in the Comments or send us an email.  I am curious also.

Update:  A point of clarification is needed.  This refers to a single rank above firefighter.  Mostly firefighters with just one rank above that.

*  *  *  *  *  *  *