"ليس لدينا ما يكفي من المدراء كما ينبغي ولكن نفضل أن يكونوا قليلين على أن يكونوا كثيرين"

Balancing the number of managers in an organization can be tricky. The essence of this idea is simple: having too many managers can be worse than having too few. The core of it is about efficiency and autonomy. Too many managers can bog down decision-making and stifle innovation. On the other hand, fewer managers might mean that employees have more freedom and responsibility—leading to a more dynamic and empowered workforce.

Historically, this thought has been relevant in various business contexts, especially in startups and tech companies. These environments often thrive on innovation and agility. For example, in the early days of companies like Google and Facebook, there was a noticeable lack of rigid management structures. This allowed for rapid development and a culture where ideas could flow freely without getting stuck in layers of bureaucracy.

Think about a real-life scenario here. Picture a small, fast-growing tech startup. In its nascent stage, it’s got ten employees and just one manager. Everyone has a clear idea of their roles, but there’s also room for creativity. Team members feel a sense of ownership over their projects and the company’s success. They don't need to get approval from multiple layers of management to try out new ideas. This environment fosters quick decision-making and innovation. Now imagine the same startup growing and deciding to add more managers than necessary. Suddenly, every move requires approval, meetings multiply, and the nimbleness that once defined the company is replaced by a sluggish, bureaucratic process. The creative spark can get lost in the red tape.

So, if you find yourself in a position where you have to decide on the number of managers in your team or company, lean towards fewer. Trust your team’s competence and give them the autonomy to make decisions. Encourage an environment where employees feel empowered to take ownership of their work. Streamline processes so that innovation isn’t hindered by unnecessary management layers.

Let’s put this into a relatable story. Imagine you're part of a small marketing agency. Your team is tight-knit and everyone knows their role. You've got a manager who oversees projects but trusts each team member to handle their workload. This trust leads to creative campaigns, happy clients, and a motivated team. Now, due to some growth, you hire a couple more managers to help with the oversight. But soon, you notice that the decision-making process is getting slower. There are more meetings, more approvals needed for every idea, and the creative freedom you once enjoyed is slowly being chipped away. The team’s morale starts to drop, and the innovative campaigns become less frequent.

In essence, it’s about maintaining that balance. You don’t want to stifle your team with too many managers. Instead, foster a culture of trust and responsibility. Allow your team the freedom to innovate and make decisions—this can lead to a more dynamic, efficient, and happy workplace. And let’s face it, no one likes endless meetings or having every little decision scrutinized, right? So, when in doubt, side with fewer managers and more autonomy.