Is your executive team too big? The size of an executive team can have a significant impact on the success of an organisation. A team that is too large can lead to inefficiencies, communication breakdowns, and suboptimal decision-making. On the other hand, a team that is too small may not have the necessary skills and expertise to drive growth and innovation. In this post, we will explore the optimal size of an executive team and the risks of having a team that is too big.
How large should your executive team be? While there is no single correct answer, aside from “it depends” certain indicators suggest that your team might be too large:
Scheduling Challenges: Difficulty in coordinating everyone’s availability, resulting in infrequent team meetings.
Limited Familiarity: Team members that have been on the executive team for an extended period still don’t know each other well.
Redundant Roles: Inclusion of individuals on the team who don’t necessarily need to be there.
Advocacy Dominance: Team members spend more time advocating than inquiring, hindering effective communication.
Building trust becomes more challenging in larger teams. Trust is a formidable challenge even in small teams with regular meetings, and it becomes even more daunting in larger teams with less frequent interactions. Larger groups tend to make individuals less comfortable with vulnerability (which is crucial for admitting uncertainties), seeking help, and acknowledging mistakes—essential foundations for high-performing teams.
Accountability poses greater difficulties in larger teams. Serving on a leadership team demands commitment, not just to achieving results but also to holding each other accountable. The discomfort associated with this responsibility grows with team size, as individuals are less inclined to hold peers accountable, often leaving it to others in a larger group.
Being on an executive team is a commitment, not a reward. Someone joining the executive team as a reward rather than an organisational necessity is evident to both the individual and their peers. Such situations often arise from past needs, promotions onto the executive team that are not revisited, or circumstances like post-merger integration, resulting in duplicated roles. While initially seen as a positive gesture, the same individuals often appreciate being released from the executive team once the reality of commitment and accountability sets in.
Smaller teams prioritise inquiry. A key sign of an overly large executive team, according to Harvard Professor Chris Argyris’s research, is a shift towards advocacy (defending personal positions) over inquiry (understanding differing perspectives) in communication. This shift is a red flag, indicating that individuals, feeling time constraints, focus more on promoting their views than exploring others’ opinions.
If you suspect your executive team is too large, consider seeking input from the team. Ask each member to identify two or three individuals (in priority order) they believe must be on the team. Resizing should be approached with compassion, providing clear explanations, and you might find that team members released from their executive team membership express relief.
Ultimately the size of the team depends on how the team is functioning, with some careful observation you can detect whether you would be better off reducing the size.
For help with leadership, culture and strategy development contact me at Sarah Robertson Consulting or book a discovery call
