By explicitly setting the span of accountability wider than the span of control, leaders can force an employee or members of a team to become more entrepreneurial. In order to narrow the Span, a leader standardizes work by using measures (either financial, such as time-item budget expenses, or non-financial, such as head count) that allow few trade-offs. To widen the Span, a leader typically uses non-financial measures (such as customer satisfaction) or broad financial measures (such as profits) that allow many trade-offs.
Residing at the heart of this span is an often-elusive factor called Expectations. An employee or team is more challenged if the expectations of others in the organization are higher (though higher expectations often come with greater authority over and access to organizational resources). There are Formal Expectations. These are the designated and assigned outcomes for the employee or team. Informal Expectations often come in the form of Hope. These are the often unacknowledged, but shared, expectations regarding the outcomes of work done by an individual or team members if they are highly successful. We are likely to be more challenged if the expectations of others in the organization are higher (though higher expectations often come with greater authority over and access to organizational resources).
Span of Influence: [Internal Locus of Control] [Demand Element]: The span of influence, according to Simons, corresponds to the width of the net that a team needs to cast in collecting data, probing for new information, and attempting to influence the work of others. Leaders can widen the span when they want to stimulate their employees and teams to think outside the box to develop new ways of serving customers, increasing internal efficiencies, or adapting to changes in external markets. Leaders can widen a team’s span of influence by redesigning the task assigned to this employee or project team. For instance, the team can be encouraged to enter into a cross-functional relationship with another team.
Leaders can also adjust an employee’s or team’s span of influence through the level of goals they set. Although the nature of a team’s goals drives its span of accountability (by determining the trade-offs team members can make), the level or difficulty, drives her sphere of influence. As Simons observed, a team that is given a stretch goal will often be forced to seek out and interact with more people and other teams than a team or person whose goal is set at a much lower level. Finally, leaders can use accounting and control systems to adjust the span of influence (e.g. assigning indirect cost allocations to the team).
Leaders can narrow the Span by requiring members of their organization to pay attention only to their own jobs; do not allocate costs across units; use single reporting lines; and reward individual performance. Conversely, they can widen the Span by injecting creative tension through structures, systems, and goals. For example, the leader can form cross-unit teams, matrix structures, and cross-unit cost allocations.
We can once again move into the heart of this third span —and we will find Motivation. In this case, it is all about motivating other people —we influence them by increasing their desire to (and potentially ability) to achieve some important (shared) goal. A job holder or team members are likely to gain much more support in an organization (yet also increase expectations) if they hold the potential of influencing (motivating) other projects in the organization.
