Views expressed in this article are the author's and do not necessarily reflect any associated organizations.

In the world of local government, smaller municipalities often face tough decisions about how to manage limited resources while maintaining high-quality services. One strategy many have turned to in an effort to save money and streamline operations is departmental consolidation. While this approach can lead to cost savings and create opportunities for higher salaries for key staff, it can also bring about unintended consequences that affect the long-term effectiveness of governance. The town of Wickenburg, Arizona, offers an insightful example of how consolidation can present both opportunities and challenges, particularly when leadership resources become stretched too thin.

The Drive for Consolidation

Wickenburg, like many smaller municipalities, has faced fiscal pressures that have led to the consolidation of several departments under a single leadership structure. The deputy town manager, for example, not only oversees his primary responsibilities as deputy town manager but also serves as the economic development director. In addition, he manages public information and grants, community development, community services and recreation, the library, special events, facility rentals, and IT services.

This approach is designed to streamline administrative functions, reduce overhead, and centralize leadership. On paper, consolidating multiple departments under a single individual can seem like an efficient way to save costs, particularly by eliminating the need for several department heads. Moreover, having one person oversee multiple functions might improve coordination and create a unified vision for decision-making.

However, as Wickenburg’s experience demonstrates, the reality of consolidation is far more complex. The benefits of efficiency and cost savings need to be carefully weighed against the potential risks to leadership capacity, service quality, and employee morale.

The Challenge: Overloaded Leadership

When Wickenburg’s town manager position recently became vacant, the natural assumption might have been that the experienced deputy town manager, with his broad institutional knowledge and leadership skills, would step into the role of interim town manager. However, this was not feasible. With so many critical departments under his oversight, the deputy town manager simply did not have the time or capacity to take on this additional responsibility. The demands of managing economic development, public information, community services, and other departments were too great, and as a result, the Town had to contract out for an interim town manager, incurring additional costs.

The situation highlights a key challenge of departmental consolidation: overloaded leadership. While the deputy town manager is undoubtedly capable, managing a diverse range of departments can stretch even the most experienced leaders. The result is a leadership structure that becomes too diffuse to respond effectively to emerging needs—such as the unexpected vacancy of the town manager position. This scenario underscores the need for careful planning when it comes to consolidating leadership roles.

Striking a Balance: Specialization and Focus

Wickenburg’s experience with its Public Works Department highlights the challenge of balancing broad leadership responsibilities with the need for specialized expertise. The public works director oversees a diverse range of critical services, including the airport, project management, parks, facilities, streets, sanitation, fleet, electric, and both water and wastewater systems (across two separate systems). While this expansive scope of oversight may seem like an efficient way to consolidate resources, it presents significant challenges. Each of these areas requires specialized knowledge, from infrastructure management and environmental compliance for water systems to the intricacies of parks development and airport operations. Managing such a wide range of services under a single leader can strain both decision-making and operational effectiveness, as the director’s attention is divided across too many specialized areas.

Impact on Organizational Efficiency and Employee Morale

When one person is responsible for so many diverse areas, the consequences often extend beyond the leadership team to include employees in those departments. Staff in specialized fields like IT or recreation programming may feel their needs and expertise are undervalued if they are managed by someone without a deep understanding of their work. This lack of specialized oversight can result in employees feeling disconnected from leadership, which may lead to decreased morale, disengagement, and even higher turnover.

A recent survey conducted as part of an analysis of the Public Works Department’s organizational structure revealed that while 69% of employees reported their job responsibilities were clear, 26.9% found their workloads either "somewhat heavy" or "too heavy," and only 59% felt their skills were fully utilized. 

Stakeholder interviews further highlighted that communication barriers between divisions often left employees feeling isolated from leadership decisions, and managers struggled to dedicate sufficient time to addressing their teams' needs. Supervisors expressed a strong desire for greater delegation and mentorship opportunities to bolster team morale and development. These factors contribute to ongoing turnover challenges, with over 44% of survey respondents rating the department’s efficiency and adaptability as "neutral" or lower.

Additionally, overloaded leadership can limit opportunities for mentorship and professional development. If managers are unable to dedicate sufficient time to overseeing each department, employees may feel unsupported in their professional growth. Over time, this can erode the institutional knowledge and expertise within the organization, further exacerbating challenges and inefficiencies.

The Financial and Long-Term Costs of Consolidation

At first glance, departmental consolidation might appear to be a cost-saving measure, particularly when it reduces the number of department heads and eliminates administrative overhead. However, the hidden costs of consolidation—such as the inefficiencies and leadership gaps that arise from overburdened directors—can quickly outweigh the initial savings. In Wickenburg’s case, the need to hire an interim town manager due to the deputy town manager’s inability to step into the role resulted in unanticipated expenses. Hiring an interim town manager through a contracted firm is costing the town $340,000 per year. Furthermore, delays in decision-making or lack of focus on specialized areas can lead to longer-term financial consequences, such as missed opportunities for grants, economic development, or service improvement.

In addition to direct financial costs, reduced service quality can also harm the town’s reputation, which could impact public satisfaction and engagement. If residents feel that critical services are not being properly managed or that leadership is not responsive to their needs, it could undermine trust in local government and reduce citizen participation in community programs.

Finding the Right Balance: A Sustainable Approach to Consolidation

Wickenburg’s experience underscores the importance of finding a balance when it comes to departmental consolidation. While consolidating functions can offer financial benefits and improve coordination in certain areas, municipalities must carefully consider the long-term impact on leadership, service delivery, and employee morale. Consolidation should not be driven solely by the desire to save money or increase salary offerings to a few individuals but should be part of a strategic, thoughtful approach to organizational design. 

For Wickenburg, a more sustainable approach might involve evaluating which departments truly benefit from being consolidated and which require independent leadership. For example, departments such as airport management, economic development, community development, water, and wastewater may benefit from dedicated leaders with specialized expertise. Meanwhile, areas like public information and grants, recreation, and library services could potentially be managed more effectively under a shared leadership structure.

Ultimately, the key to successful departmental consolidation is ensuring that leadership resources are appropriately allocated, and that leaders have the capacity and expertise to meet the specific needs of the departments they oversee. By balancing efficiency with specialization, municipalities can improve both service delivery and organizational effectiveness, while avoiding the unintended consequences that arise when leadership becomes overloaded.

Wickenburg’s experience serves as a valuable lesson for municipalities navigating the complexities of consolidation. Thoughtful planning and a clear understanding of the unique needs of each department can ensure that consolidation enhances—not hinders—the effectiveness of local government.