Q&A
Is it inappropriate for a supervisor to be responsible for as many as 19 subordinates? From top: Sergeant George Gasiorowski, Sergeant Nick Sipovac and Detective Sgt Lindsay Pratt.
Sergeant George Gasiorowski
Sergeant Nick Sipovac
Detective Sgt Lindsay Pratt
Eastern Adelaide Traffic
Elizabeth Police Station
Sturt CIB
Supervisors today handle greater workloads, are more accountable, and there is much more oversight than in years gone by. To effectively manage volume vetting, ongoing IPM procedures, various audit processes and HR issues, supervisors can often undertake largely an administrative role, with a lessened capacity for front-line supervision. What is considered a manageable span of control will obviously vary between individual workplaces and supervisors. Some areas might not encounter the same generated work volume as others, but the fundamentals of supervision, training and people management remain the same. It might be possible to be responsible for 19 subordinates but, in some cases, it might also come at the expense of accountability and effectiveness in addressing corporate risk. I support a smaller span-of-control model where supervisors have greater potential for managing their workloads and staff to efficient and effective service standards.
The patrol supervisor function has evolved over the past number of years with greater responsibilities and accountabilities which make managing a patrol team difficult. At Elizabeth, the hardest thing is getting out of the office due to vetting and other admin duties. Having 19 people will increase the overall workload on supervisors, especially in areas in which they aren’t used to having these types of numbers on their teams. More people plus more paperwork being submitted equals more vetting, more IPMs, more HR issues, and so on. Managing 19 people will add to the workload and give me even less time on the road doing my actual job, supervising, which is unfair to my troops who rely on me at times to attend their taskings and provide advice.
Supervising 19 CIB members would effectively change a CIB supervisor’s role from an operational sergeant to a purely administrative role. A supervisor would not be able to effectively monitor and oversee investigations and workloads to an acceptable standard. Supervisors are, among many other things, required to report fortnightly on team investigations. This can be challenging with high workloads, reduced numbers and a high level of accountability. Significant issues would arise if subordinate numbers were to double. These would include an inability to be able to effectively manage and oversee investigations, increased workloads for supervisors, and an inability to effectively manage operational requirements and train junior members. It could also result in the allocation of tasks to team members when they should be conducted by a supervisor. However, doubling supervisors’ workloads would make them less effective in their operational policing.
AUGUST 2015 POLICE JOURNAL
25