Dear Bob ... I just read your response to Not enough skills to cover the need and I must write to tell you the most obvious problem to me is too many managers. "Doing too much" states that his 3 managers are managing 2, 4 & 7 people. That's 4 managers for 13 staff. Sorry, in my book that's at least 2, and maybe 3 managers too many. A manager should be able to manage 10 - 15 people. If not, they are not managing Dear Bob …I just read your response to Not enough skills to cover the need and I must write to tell you the most obvious problem to me is too many managers. “Doing too much” states that his 3 managers are managing 2, 4 & 7 people. That’s 4 managers for 13 staff. Sorry, in my book that’s at least 2, and maybe 3 managers too many. A manager should be able to manage 10 – 15 people. If not, they are not managing or not a good manager… – Flat Org-er Dear Shrek …I don’t necessarily agree with you on the 10 to 15 direct reports piece. If the only responsibility the manager has is supervision that works. Most managers these days – especially those who manage knowledge workers – have a significant level of personal work they’re responsible for as well. But I’ll agree that with thirteen people it doesn’t feel right.The flip side, and the reason I didn’t head down that path, is that it depends a lot on the breadth of responsibility. If your model of management is that a manager is responsible for a business function rather than for some number of employees, it’s entirely reasonable that you’d need three managers to handle three important business functions, even if some of them had no direct reports at all. – Bob Technology Industry