In the MT140 Unit 4 organizational structure exercise below, a contact center's chart is drawn twice, with a span count and a delegation table between the two versions. Searches like "mt 140 unit 4 assignment example", "mt140 unit 4 sample" and "mt140 unit 4 example" land here.
What a finished MT140 Unit 4 organizational structure exercise looks like
Three exhibits and about two pages of explanation. Exhibit one is the current chart: a center manager, one floor supervisor and thirty-eight agents drawn as a single flat row, plus a quality analyst attached sideways to nobody in particular. Exhibit two counts spans, setting thirty-eight direct reports against the range the course reading suggests for routine, scripted work. Exhibit three is the proposed chart, adding three team leads promoted from the agent floor, each with twelve or thirteen agents, and moving the quality analyst under the supervisor. The delegation table beneath lists eight routine decisions, such as approving a schedule swap or issuing a goodwill credit up to a set limit, and shows who decides now and who decides after. Short explanations tie each change to a named principle.
How a MT140 Unit 4 example is structured
The sample treats the charts as evidence and the prose as argument. A short introduction names the center, its hours and the complaint prompting the exercise: agents waiting on hold for their own supervisor to approve routine credits. Key terms follow in one compact paragraph, covering chain of command, unity of command, span of control and delegation, each cited once. The current chart comes next, with a paragraph identifying two structural faults, a span far too wide and a quality analyst with no clear line. The span calculation appears as a small table rather than a sentence. The proposed chart follows, and a paragraph explains what each new box does. The delegation table forms the final exhibit, and the closing paragraph weighs costs, three lead stipends against fewer escalations, and names what the redesign cannot fix.
The chart as it stands
A manager, a supervisor and a flat line of thirty-eight agents, drawn with standard boxes and solid lines. The quality analyst hangs off to one side on a dotted line, because nobody could say whom that role answers to.
Counting the span
A three-row table setting the supervisor's direct reports against a reasonable range for standardized phone work, cited to the course text. The gap appears as a number rather than a description of something large.
Three leads drawn in
The revised chart adds a team lead layer, each lead carrying twelve or thirteen agents while still taking calls for part of the day. Solid lines everywhere, and every box answers to exactly one person.
Decisions that move down
Eight routine decisions in three columns: the decision, who holds it today, and who holds it after the change. Credits and schedule swaps pass to leads, while terminations and policy exceptions stay with the supervisor.
What the redesign costs and misses
Lead stipends, time off the phones and a training day, set against fewer escalations. The paragraph also admits that no chart can fix a staffing shortfall, which is a question for a different unit.
Where marks go in MT140 Unit 4
A chart drawn and never explained is where structure exercises bleed marks first, as though the boxes could speak for themselves. Rubrics in many sections want each structural choice tied to a principle by name, so a new layer with no span reasoning behind it earns only partial credit. Unity of command errors are common and costly: a revised chart where an agent answers to both a lead and the quality analyst repeats the problem it was meant to fix. Delegation goes wrong in two directions, handing down nothing of consequence or handing down decisions that plainly belong higher, such as discipline. Charts redrawn for the whole company rather than one department overreach the supervisor-level scope the course keeps. Illegible diagrams cost points as well, since a grader has to be able to follow the lines.
Get a MT140 Unit 4 example written to your instructions
Where do decisions stall in your department, and how many people report to whom? Those two answers, plus the Unit 4 instructions and rubric, produce both charts, the span table and the delegation list within 24-48h, drawn to paste cleanly into a paper. The first sample is free.
MT140 Unit 4 questions, answered
What software should the org chart be drawn in?
Whatever produces clean, legible boxes and lines. Word and PowerPoint both include hierarchy graphics, and free diagram tools work too. Check whether your section wants the chart embedded in the paper or attached separately. Label every box with a role title rather than a person's name, and keep solid lines for direct reporting and dotted lines for advisory relationships.
Is there a correct span of control number?
No single number, and your readings will likely say so. Routine, standardized work supports wider spans than complex or varied work, and experienced teams need less supervision than new ones. State the range the paper is using, cite where it comes from, and explain why this department falls where it does. That reasoning is the part that gets graded.
Can the exercise be based on my own employer?
Yes, provided the company stays unidentifiable. Replace its name, adjust headcounts slightly if they would reveal it, and use role titles only. Your own workplace often gives the best material, because you know where approvals actually stall, and that is exactly the evidence a delegation table needs before a grader will find it convincing.