We propose a model to study the provision of monitoring incentives in loan syndicates when banks differ in scope. Because bank scope increases a bank's total exposure to firm performance beyond its loan share, banks of wide scope have incentives to monitor the firm even when they receive small loan shares. As such, they are more likely to be chosen as lead arrangers, yet receive comparatively small lead shares. We confirm these predictions empirically by exploiting the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act. Our findings suggest that the observed increases in syndicated-loan volumes and simultaneous decreases in lead shares over the last two decades are not associated with losses in monitoring efficiency.