• HŪMNZ Newsletter
  • Posts
  • The HŪMNZ Element: Issue 39 - What Every Management Layer Really Costs

The HŪMNZ Element: Issue 39 - What Every Management Layer Really Costs

Every layer you add slows the business and blurs who owns the outcome, and almost no one goes back to count the cost.

Author

Tim Dennis
November 03, 2026

💡 Editor's Note

You added the layer for a good reason. The team grew, spans got wide, someone needed to manage the managers, so you added a level. It solved the problem in front of you.

It also added a step to every decision, a filter on every piece of information, and one more person who owns a slice of the outcome but not the whole of it.

Every layer is a sensible call on the day you make it. The cost shows up later, in how slowly the whole business moves.

Before you add another level to the org chart, find out how many decisions already travel through the ones you have.

Five questions, 90 seconds, a read on your own operation straight away. No call to book, no gate.

Executive Brief

Bottom line: Management layers are easy to add and hard to remove. Each one looks necessary when it is created, then quietly slows decisions, blurs accountability, and adds a cost no one revisits.

Bain's benchmarking of more than 125 companies found that a typical organization runs six to seven direct reports per manager and eight to nine layers between senior leadership and the frontline. The best run carry wider spans, 10 to 15 reports, and no more than seven layers. Spans are what drive layers: the fewer people each manager leads, the more managers you need, and the taller the company gets.

That structure is expensive. Gary Hamel and Michele Zanini, writing in Harvard Business Review, estimated that excess bureaucracy drains "more than $3 trillion in lost economic output" from the U.S. economy, roughly 17% of GDP. Most of the waste is invisible: slower decisions, and capable people spending their days managing instead of doing.

In 30 seconds

  • A level gets added to solve one problem, then outlives it.

  • Wide spans keep a company flat; narrow spans make it tall.

  • Every layer a decision passes through adds delay and dilutes ownership.

  • Flattening the structure is one of the few moves that speeds the business and lowers cost at once.

⚠️ Four signals leaders should be watching this week

1. How many layers sit between you and the work?

Signal: There are more levels between you and the person serving the customer than you can name from memory.

Evidence: Bain's benchmarking puts a typical company at eight to nine layers between leadership and the frontline, and the best run at seven or fewer.

Implication: The taller the company, the longer the distance between a problem on the frontline and the person with authority to fix it. Information loses something at every handoff.

Action: Draw the actual chain from you to one frontline role and count the levels. More than seven is a structure problem, not a people problem.

2. How many people does each manager actually lead?

Signal: You have managers with only two or three direct reports.

Evidence: Bain's benchmark span is six to seven, and the best run companies reach 10 to 15 for most roles. Thin spans are the root cause of extra layers.

Implication: A manager with three reports tends to manage more closely than the work needs, and that thin span becomes the case for another level above them.

Action: List any manager with fewer than four direct reports. Each is a candidate to widen the span or flatten the level.

3. How far does a normal decision have to travel?

Signal: Routine decisions move up the layers for approval and back down for action.

Evidence: More layers mean a slower flow of decisions, which is Bain's own finding. Every approval step adds delay the customer eventually feels.

Implication: When authority sits several levels above the work, the business runs at the speed of its longest approval chain, not its best people.

Action: Pick one decision that needs your sign-off today and shouldn't. Push that authority down a level this week, in writing.

4. Did you add a manager to fix a process?

Signal: The last management role you created was a response to things falling through the cracks.

Evidence: Layers often get added to cover for unclear ownership or broken handoffs, but a new manager supervises the gap rather than closing it.

Implication: You end up paying a salary to coordinate around a problem a clearer process would have solved, and the layer outlives the reason it was created.

Action: For the last manager role you added, name the process failure behind it. Fix that, then ask whether the layer is still needed.

Stat of the Week

$3 trillion

What excess bureaucracy drains from the U.S. economy each year, roughly 17% of GDP, as estimated by Gary Hamel and Michele Zanini in Harvard Business Review.

Most of it isn't in salaries. It is in decisions that take too long and work that waits on an approval.

Sources: Gary Hamel and Michele Zanini, Harvard Business Review (2016). Spans-and-layers benchmarks from Bain & Company's organizational database of more than 125 companies.

The Core Question

Every layer on your org chart was added to solve a real problem. That is why they are so hard to see as a cost. Each one has a reason, and none of them has a review date.

Structure is a decision you make once and pay for every day after. Yours is probably taller than the business needs, because adding a level takes an afternoon and removing one takes a reorganization.

If you had to run the business with one fewer layer, which would it be, and what would have to become clearer for that to work?

The VALŪE lens: A tall organization is slow and expensive at the same time: slower decisions now, a thinner and more fragile operation later. Buyers read excess layers as cost to cut and accountability to untangle. A flatter structure with clear ownership runs faster and is worth more, because it shows the business was designed rather than accumulated.

Adding a layer is easy. Building a business that does not need one is the real work.

Know a leader whose org chart keeps getting taller? Send this on.

Until next time,

The HŪMNZ Element · Weekly Pulse

If this was useful, forward it to one person: a leader who is one reorganization away from a faster business.