Ideal Number of Direct Reports

Amazon’s decision to cut 15% of its managers likely comes from a closer look at ratios. Were there too many managers with only 2-3 direct reports? That’s entirely possible. From my time at AWS, I didn’t see this much in engineering, so I doubt those teams will feel it as hard. But other departments with too many managers overseeing too few people were probably more bloated. It’s similar to what Meta’s doing in its “Year of Efficiency,” flattening structures and cutting unnecessary roles to make teams leaner and more agile.

It’s likely Amazon found departments with bloated management structures where managers oversee just a couple of direct reports. That’s inefficient, especially at Amazon’s scale. If some areas had too many middle managers doing very little oversight, then trimming the fat makes sense. But, of course, it depends on which part of the company you’re looking at.

In any event, this brings us to a good question: What’s the ideal number of direct reports for a manager in engineering? You don’t have to wait for an answer. I have my magic number: seven. Well, obviously, it can’t be just one number, so let’s explore span of control, why seven and what data says.

Span Of Control

Span of control is basically how many people a manager directly manages. If it is a narrow span, like fewer than five people, it is when a manager needs to be hands on, coding and contributing. You are able to spend more time mentoring, guiding, and really digging into the details of each team member’s work. This level of closeness can be useful in very technical environments. Nevertheless, there is a downside. It might be too narrow. You might end up micromanaging or dealing with too many layers of management. It obviously can make everything move slower than it needs to.

On the other hand, a wide span of control over ten people means fewer layers and faster decision making. Nonetheless, it can overwhelm the manager. It becomes harder to stay present for individuals, and harder to maintain consistent quality across the team. It is like trying to keep up with too many spinning plates. The wider the span, the more a manager relies on structure, clarity, and established processes rather than personal involvement. In engineering teams, the sweet spot tends to be around five to nine reports in my experience.

This range creates a balance where the manager is not spread too thin, yet still close enough to the work to influence direction, culture, and quality. It is the surface area where leadership effort produces the highest return.

Why Seven Works

Seven strikes the right balance. From my experience and what I have seen, when a manager has about seven direct reports, they have enough bandwidth to give attention to each team member while also staying involved in higher level strategic tasks. It keeps you close enough to the work without pulling you into every detail. When you dip below that, like two or three reports, the manager is not really managing. They are more of a peer or, worse, micromanaging. On the other hand, managing more than ten or twelve people starts stretching the manager too thin, making it hard to build meaningful relationships with people, give proper feedback, or dive deep into the work.

Seven also creates a natural rhythm. The team is large enough to feel like a real unit, but small enough that you actually know what everyone is doing and what they need. In my experience, this size allows problems to surface early and wins to spread faster.

It also gives the manager space to think, plan, and work on the broader system around the team, rather than spending all their energy reacting to immediate needs. This balance is difficult to maintain with fewer or significantly more direct reports.

Seven direct reports strike an optimal balance because of practical time management constraints. Consider the following simple formula to illustrate this. To determine the optimal number of direct reports for a manager, let us consider the total time required within a standard forty hour workweek.

Total Time Required

• Meetings: N hours (assuming an hour per direct report and related project)
• Administrative Tasks: N hours (performance reviews, approvals, feedback, requests, interviewing, etc.)
• Coordination and Communication: 10 hours
• Strategic Planning and Execution: 10 hours

Coordination and Communication

This time is devoted to ensuring smooth operation within the team and effective collaboration with other parts of the organization. It includes:

1. Team Meetings and Sync-Ups (2 hours):
   • Weekly Team Meetings: Facilitating discussions on project updates, roadblocks, and upcoming priorities.
   • Check-Ins: Brief meetings to align on daily tasks and identify immediate needs.
2. Cross-Departmental Collaboration (2 hours):
   • Interdepartmental Meetings: Coordinating with other teams to manage upstream and downstream dependencies and align on shared goals.
   • Stakeholder Engagements: Communicating with clients or senior leadership to provide updates and gather feedback.
3. Communication Management (2 hours):
   • Email Correspondence: Reading and responding to important emails from team members and other stakeholders.
   • Messaging and Calls: Real-time communication to address urgent matters and make quick decisions.
4. Conflict Resolution and Support (2 hours):
   • Addressing Team Issues: Mediating conflicts, handling competitive dynamics, providing support, setting goals, and ensuring a positive team environment.
   • Resource Allocation: Managing team workload and reallocating resources as needed.
5. Oncall Duties (2 hours):
   • Availability for Urgent Issues: Spending time on addressing critical problems that arise unexpectedly, requiring immediate attention.
   • Postmortems: Providing guidance to team members on writing postmortems and promoting incident learnings

Strategic Planning and Execution

This period focuses on higher-level responsibilities that drive the team’s success and contribute to organizational goals.

1. Long-Term Planning (2 hours):
   • Strategic Roadmapping: Defining the team’s vision, setting long-term objectives, and outlining the steps to achieve them in the roadmap.
   • Budgeting and Resource Planning: Allocating budgets and resources to meet strategic goals effectively.
2. Performance Analysis and Reporting (2 hours):
   • Data Review: Analyzing KPIs to assess team progress.
   • Reporting: Preparing reports for senior management to highlight achievements and areas for improvement.
3. Process Improvement (2 hours):
   • Workflow Optimization: Identifying inefficiencies and implementing solutions to enhance productivity.
   • Engineering Health Activities: Finding engineering health problems and allocating resources.
   • Adoption of Best Practices: Staying updated with industry trends and integrating them into the team’s processes.
4. Professional Development Planning (2 hours):
   • Team Growth Strategies: Planning training sessions, workshops, or mentorship programs to develop team skills.
   • Self-Development: Engaging in activities that enhance the manager’s own leadership abilities.
   • Networking: Building relationships within and outside the organization to facilitate collaboration and new opportunities.
5. Innovation and Strategic Initiatives (2 hours):
6. Exploring New Opportunities: Researching emerging technologies, market trends, or new methodologies that could benefit the team or organization.
7. Pilot Projects: Initiating and overseeing small-scale projects to test new ideas before wider implementation.

Adding it all up

• Total Time = (N hours for meetings) + (N hours for admin tasks) + 10 hours for coordination + 10 hours for planning
• Total Time = 2N + 20 hours

To avoid overextending, the total time should not exceed a 40-hour workweek:

• 2N + 20 ≤ 40

Solving for N:

• 2N ≤ 20
• N ≤ 10

While technically up to 10 direct reports fit within the time constraint, this leaves no buffer for unforeseen issues or in-depth engagement.

Evaluating Specific Scenarios

• At N = 7:
  • Total Time = 2(7) + 20 = 34 hours
  • This leaves 6 hours for flexibility, deep dives, and unexpected tasks.
• At N = 6:
  • Total Time = 2(6) + 20 = 32 hours
  • Leaves 8 hours free, but the manager may be underutilized and risk micromanaging.
• At N = 8:
  • Total Time = 2(8) + 20 = 36 hours
  • Only 4 hours remain, reducing flexibility.

Therefore, seven direct reports provide a sweet spot:

• Efficient use of the manager’s time
• Enough bandwidth for individual attention
• Sufficient flexibility for additional responsibilities

This balance minimizes the risks of micromanagement associated with too few reports and the overextension that comes with too many, making seven the optimal number.

I believe an effective manager regardless of the hierarchy typically spends around at least 20 hours per week on responsibilities beyond direct report interactions. This is why managing approximately seven direct reports is optimal. It allows managers to effectively balance providing support to their team with fulfilling broader organizational duties.

What the Data Say

The data around span of control shows that the sweet spot for effective management typically falls between 7-9 direct reports. Quantum Workplace analyzed over 20,000 managers and found that engagement peaked with 8-9 reports. Managers with this span of control can maintain meaningful relationships with their teams without becoming overwhelmed by administrative duties. Too few direct reports (fewer than 5) leads to micromanagement, while managing more than 10 increases the risk of burnout and inefficiency​.

Similarly, McKinsey highlights that in complex, dynamic environments like engineering, this range is optimal. They suggest that more intricate work requires closer oversight, making 7-9 reports ideal for balancing leadership and project management​.

No One Size Fits All

From my experience, there’s really no one-size-fits-all approach to span of control. I know I just said 7 is the magic number, but hey, it depends! The reality is, it’s about context. If the manager’s more experienced, they can juggle more direct reports because they know how to delegate effectively and keep things moving. But if their team is full of juniors, the manager’s going to need a smaller span to really coach and develop them properly.

And let’s be real. If the manager is still hands-on, like contributing code or being involved in day-to-day execution, they’re going to need a smaller team. On the other hand, if they’re more focused on strategy and high-level decision-making, they can take on more people. It also depends on the type of work. Teams working on high-collaboration projects need more attention, while teams running more independent streams can get away with having a bigger span. So yeah, seven might be the sweet spot in some cases, but there’s definitely no hard rule here!

Alright, I’ll admit it. Seven is my magic number, but it’s not some universal law. Every manager and every team is different. I might swear by seven, but the reality is that no number works for everyone. There are a ton of variables that play into the ideal span of control, from the manager’s experience, to how self-sufficient the team is, to the kind of work they’re tackling. So yeah, while I’ll keep claiming seven is perfect, even I know it’s just a guideline. Don’t be afraid to call my bullshit. Just make sure you’re looking at your own context and needs before locking in that number!