It seems to be the same in every company. Layer upon layer of managers and supervisors that don't actually DO anything.

Companies would be so much more efficiently run without them, so what causes this?

EDIT: I think I might have something of an answer here thanks for @ABigguhPizzahPieh 's comment/video they posted. So, the notion of "robots are going to take our jobs" has actually already happened, and it's been happening for decades. There's just not enough work to go around for everyone. But reducing the work week from 40 hours is obviously unconscionable in capitalism, because working people aren't allowed to have nice things or better lives, so instead there has grown a massive layer of managerial and clerical type "workers" who are paid to do nothing for 40 hours a week and are miserable for it.

  • zifnab25 [he/him, any]
    ·
    4 years ago

    Bureaucracies have traditionally existed to off-load time-consuming work from a single individual onto a multitude. So when your company grows from 5 employees to 50, you need to expand HR to manage them all. And then you need someone to manage HR, in turn.

    Since one person can't efficiently manage more than five or ten others, this creates layers of management as the company grows.

    But then you have to factor in that people are lazy. If I bust ass, I can manage 20 people. But busting ass sucks. It's miserable. Far better to hire a deputy and give the deputy 10 people to manage. Or... better still, two deputies. And then I've got time to myself. I've got a department with a budget and my company is doing well. Why not?

    So management metasticizes. And the folks at the top rely on the folks in the middle to communicate what the folks at the bottom are doing. A CEO can't fire his VP, because the VP is the guy he interfaces with every day. And a VP can't fire his director. And the director can't fire his manager. And the manager can't fire his supervisor. Not without assuming those associated roles.

    The only people you can comfortably fire are the lowest level staffers. At worst, those roles go back onto the supervisor. The supervisor gets to keep his job and the manager gets to say "We cut the employment budget!" up the chain to the director who tells it to the VP who tells it to the CEO. And everyone's happy.

    But now you have a system where the business cycle grows the management tree while trimming the employee base.

    It's a recipe for this kind of management creep.