The Great Flattening: What Executives Must Know About Expanding Span of Control

A Senior Leader’s View

Key Stats at a Glance:

Global span of control: 10.9 → 12.1 in one year
Japan challenge: How many "managers" don't manage people?
Over-aging organizations: Titles based on tenure, not capability
The feedback gap: 50% of managers think they give weekly feedback; only 20% of employees agree

Reading time: 4 minutes

The Hidden Challenge in Japan

The "Great Flattening" is here. Across industries, organizations are reducing management layers and increasing the number of people reporting to each supervisor. The average span of control grew from 10.9 to 12.1 in just one year (2024-2025). Tech companies are eliminating middle management. Finance is under pressure to reduce costs. You're likely hearing the same mandate from global headquarters.

But before you flatten your organization in Japan, ask yourself a harder question first: How many of your "managers" actually manage people?

Here's the uncomfortable truth: In many Japanese organizations facing over-aging challenges, "manager" has become a tenure-based title, not a people leadership role. You have 部長 (buchou) and 課長 (kachou) who manage projects, not people. Senior individual contributors with management titles. Specialists promoted based on years of service, not coaching capability.

So when global says "increase span of control" or "flatten the structure," you're facing a double challenge: First, identifying who can actually lead larger teams. Second, addressing what happens to those with manager titles who've never truly managed.

This isn't just a Japan problem—it's a Japan-specific version of a global challenge. And it requires a different approach.

What Gallup's Research Reveals (And What It Assumes)

Recent Gallup research analyzing 92,252 teams across 104 organizations shows that larger teams can work effectively. Some managers successfully lead 25 or more people with high engagement. The key finding? Manager quality matters more than team size. A talented manager with 15 direct reports will outperform a weak manager with five.

But here's the assumption buried in that research: These are actual managers who were selected and developed for people leadership. They actively coach teams. They spend their time developing others.

In many Japanese organizations, that assumption doesn't hold. When you audit who actually manages people versus who holds a management title, you often find a 30-40% gap. These aren't really managers in the functional sense—they're senior employees who earned titles through tenure.

The implication? When global mandates wider spans of control, you first need to figure out who your real managers are.

Four Non-Negotiables for Success

1. First, Know Who Your Real Managers Are

Before you can expand span of control, you need an honest audit. Who actually leads people versus who has a management title? In my experience working with Japanese subsidiaries, this reveals uncomfortable truths.

The traditional approach—promotion by tenure and past individual contributor excellence—has created organizations top-heavy with titles but light on actual people leadership. Long tenure does not equal the ability to lead larger teams.

This requires separating your "management track" from your "technical specialist track" clearly and legitimately. Not everyone needs to manage people to advance their career. In fact, forcing high-performing technical experts into management roles often creates two problems: you lose a great IC and gain a mediocre manager.

2. Then, Identify Who Has Talent to Scale

Gallup's research identifies five key traits that predict management success: Motivation (inspiring exceptional work), Workstyle (setting goals and arranging resources), Initiation (influencing others and pushing through resistance), Collaboration (building committed teams), and Thought Process (analytical approach to strategy).

These traits matter far more than years of service. Scientific assessment of management capability, not title level or tenure, should determine who gets expanded spans of control.

The uncomfortable truth: You may need to make difficult decisions about who can handle larger teams and who cannot. This isn't about age—it's about capability and willingness to truly coach others.

3. Solve the Player-Coach Problem

Ninety-seven percent of managers globally report having individual contributor responsibilities. The median manager spends 40% of their time on IC work. The research is clear: when managers exceed that 40% threshold, engagement drops—and it gets worse as team size increases.

In Japan, the player-coach problem is often more severe. Many managers are expert ICs leading small teams while doing the bulk of technical work themselves. If you expand their teams without removing IC work, you're setting them up to fail.

The question you must answer: What non-managerial work can you remove? Who needs to step back to full IC roles? What can be delegated or eliminated entirely?

4. Make Weekly Feedback Non-Negotiable

Here's the most important finding from Gallup's research: Weekly meaningful feedback drives engagement regardless of team size. Employees who receive it are three times more engaged than those who don't, whether they're on a team of 5 or 25.

But there's a massive perception gap: 50% of managers believe they provide weekly feedback, while only 20% of employees agree. In Japan, where high-context communication and indirect feedback are cultural norms, this gap is likely even larger.

This isn't about importing Western-style feedback practices wholesale. It's about adapting the frequency and quality standards to work in Japanese culture. Fifteen to thirty minutes per week, focused on recognition, collaboration, goals, and strengths. It doesn't require confrontation—it requires consistency.

Critical Insight: "Before you can expand span of control, you must first understand how many of your 'managers' actually manage people. In over-aged Japanese organizations, title and function often diverge."

The Japan-Specific Execution Challenge

You're navigating two competing forces:

From Global: Reduce management layers. Increase span of control. Lower costs. Move fast.

Your Local Reality: Over-aged organization with tenure-based titles. Manager titles without people management responsibilities. Cultural sensitivities around title and role changes. Limited pipeline of managers with actual coaching capability. Consensus-driven culture that doesn't easily scale to 1:25 ratios.

What You Must Navigate

The Title Question: You can't simply strip titles without significant career and social implications. You need to create legitimate "senior expert" or "specialist" tracks that provide a social safety valve for those transitioning away from people management.

The Capability Gap: Many titled managers have never been trained to actually manage people. Giving them larger teams without development is guaranteed failure. You need accelerated coaching capability building.

The Cultural Adaptation: Weekly feedback feels unnatural in high-context culture. Nemawashi becomes difficult with 20-person teams. Consensus-building doesn't scale indefinitely. You need to adapt practices while maintaining effectiveness.

Your strategic choice: Go slow to go fast. Use the global mandate as an opportunity to fundamentally reshape what "manager" means in your organization.

Your 90-Day Action Plan

Month 1: The Hard Truth Assessment

Map every "manager" title: Who actually leads people? How many direct reports?
Measure current engagement at team level
Assess management talent scientifically, not by tenure
Identify your real span of control starting point
Expected finding: You have fewer real managers than titles suggest

Month 2: Design Your Dual Track

Create legitimate expert/specialist career path
Pilot expanded spans with 2-3 high-capability managers only
Begin removing IC work from people managers
Launch intensive coaching capability program
Critical: Communicate the "why"—this is about effectiveness, not just cost

Month 3: Pilot and Measure

Track engagement weekly in pilot teams
Document what works (and doesn't) in Japan context
Build business case for phased rollout
Begin conversations with global: "Here's what we're learning"

Key principle: Don't expand spans until you've addressed the title versus capability gap.

What You Control (Your Negotiating Points with Global)

You Can't Control:

Pressure to flatten and reduce costs
Timeline expectations from global
Overall headcount targets

You CAN Control:

Pace: "We need six months to identify real managers and build capability"
Sequencing: "Title restructuring must precede span expansion"
Investment: "Training and assessment are prerequisites, not nice-to-haves"
Measurement: "We'll show you engagement data, not just cost savings"
Cultural adaptation: "Here's how weekly feedback works in Japan"

Your leverage: "Rushing this will fail. Let us build it right, and we'll be the model for Asia."

The Opportunity in the Challenge

The Great Flattening is coming to Japan. But it's exposing a deeper issue: organizations built on tenure-based titles rather than leadership capability.

This is your chance to fundamentally redesign what management means. To separate titles from people leadership. To build a true coaching culture. To create career paths that don't require managing people to advance.

Yes, larger spans can work—but only after you solve the Japan-specific foundation problem.

The organizations that will win: Those that use this moment to build real leadership capability, not just redraw org charts.

Key Takeaways for Japanese Executives

Three Hard Truths:

You probably have more management titles than actual people managers
Tenure-based promotion hasn't prepared most managers for larger teams
You need to solve the title vs. capability gap before expanding spans

The Bottom Line: Use the global flattening mandate as catalyst for fundamental change, not just cost reduction.

Start with the truth about who your managers really are. Then build from there.

About the Author: Karin Wellbrock is Partner and Head of Leadership Effectiveness at Kay Group in Tokyo. An ICF-PCC accredited leadership coach, she was identified as a Top 15 Coach in Tokyo in both 2024 and 2025. Karin is deeply passionate about filling organizations with leaders who know what they do and create environments and organizations where people can thrive.

Contact: karin.wellbrock@kaygroup-asia.com

References

Harter, J. (2026, January 14). Span of Control: What's the Optimal Team Size for Managers? Gallup. https://www.gallup.com/workplace/700718/span-control-optimal-team-size-managers.aspx

Gallup. (2025). State of the Global Workplace Report. Analysis of 92,252 teams across 104 organizations in 46 countries.

Wigert, B. (2024, May 28). The Strengths, Weaknesses and Blind Spots of Managers. Gallup. Study of 2,729 managers and 12,710 individual contributors in the U.S.

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2024). Employment and Wage Data. Manager-to-employee ratios across industries.

Gallup. (2024-2025). U.S. Working Population Study. Longitudinal data on average team sizes and span of control trends.

Karin WellbrockJanuary 31, 2026