The Invariants of Structures Followed by Different Organizations - Research Paper Example

Different organizations follow different organizational structures. Some organizations are entirely functional, while others are product or process related (also called divisional). Then there is a third type of structure that, in essence, groups employees by both function and product. This happens when organizations call for a multi-focus (Daft, 2009). Following this structure gets beneficial for organizations as they can cash the benefits from the two aforementioned organizational types, as well as make up for the weaknesses of both the forms. Before moving on to the core of matrix structure, and its advantages and disadvantages, it is imperative to first highlight these two types of structures. Functional Structure Under this structure, an organization is divided into specified and defined activities, through which it gains operational efficiency. Examples of specialized set of tasks would include, for example, a production, marketing, or engineering department which would only be staffed with the related set of employees, for instance, production manager, marketing consultant, and software engineer respectively. Functional structure has a number of disadvantages; like there is a lack of communication between the functional groups since all functions are virtually independent, the structure is prone to interdepartmental conflict (Price, 2007), and organizations become very slow and inflexible due to the aforementioned causes. Product Structure In other words known as divisional structure, a product structure groups each organizational function into divisions, where every division has all the related functions within it. Divisions are either segmented on geographical basis (e.g. a US division or an EU division) or on product/service basis (e.g. business or personal use). For example, Proctor and Gamble has its separate divisions for each brands; it has divisions for beauty products, e.g. Olay, Pentene, and Wella. Each of these divisions has their own sales, engineering and marketing departments. Pictorial Representation Project-driven Matrix Structure A matrix structure is mostly project-based. Sometimes for every project, a new matrix structure is designed. The project manager heads that structure, and he is responsible for directly reporting to the vice president and general manager. History and formation of Matrix Structure Even though the traditional organizations functioned smoothly, but they were unproductive, with replication of functions and uncalled-for processes around the organization. But mainly they failed when they had to cater to projects. Since cross functional projects did not exist in functional organizations, because functional managers had to manage and supervise the team of individuals gathered from various functional areas, which otherwise should have been done by project manager; this is why in the 1970s, efforts were invested to modify the organizations in order to cater for the special structures, and improve the conventional organizational structures. This is how the “Matrix” organizational system was originated (Project Management Course, 2008) Types of Matrix Organizations There are distinct types of matrix system, designed to balance the struggle between the managers’ conflicting needs. The principal types of these matrix organizations are as listed: Weak Matrix: In this type of matrix environment, the project managers are in fact concentrated to being project facilitators. They construct plans and lead the implementation. However they do not have any actual control over personnel, and are virtually entirely dependent upon the functional managers for resources (The Rialto Consultancy). Moreover, the workers have less commitment or adherence to the project managers (or the plan), because functional managers are the ones who determine the progress of the workers. Furthermore, the workers’ progress is in general determined only on the work that is done for their functional manager (Portny, 2010) — not on their project work — thus in reality a worker may consider working on a project as not pleasing or beneficial since they will have less time instead for doing their functional work. This way the project manager may see them as unmotivated (The Rialto Consultancy). Moreover conflict also arises between project managers, functional managers, and respective workers due to workers performing either functional tasks or project tasks (Portny, 2010). Mostly in such a situation, it is the project manager who is at the losing end; weak matrix makes the project manager weak (The Rialto Consultancy). Strong Matrix: In order to resolve the problems encountered in a weak matrix, the development of strong matrix took place. In this organizational structure, the tables are reversed from the weak matrix organization structure (The Rialto Consultancy). The basic purpose is that project managers are in charge for the workers, not the line managers. This gives project managers the authority to control the workers directly, and hence adequately handling the entire project (although HR department is excluded). I have worked in organizations of this manner, where I managed my groups and was accountable for everything with the exception of the HR functions, and I establish it a really rewarding surrounding from a project level of opinion. So my groups would have me as project manager and I had the lone authority and obligation to direct their work, but they also had staff managers who took care of anything that was not project-related, i.e. performance reviews, training, holiday management, contracts for employments etc. (The Rialto Consultancy). Therefore it was possible for me to focus on project management. Balanced Matrix: In a balanced matrix organizational structure, there is a blend of both strong and weak matrix (Portny, 2010). As per the projects’ needs, as well as to resolve the conflicts of control and power, people are assigned to either head the projects or become a team member of them. This depends on the line and length of work that they are asked to perform. For instance, if a worker is asked to work on a project for a lesser period of time, say a week, the functional manager (or project manager) has the sole authority over the worker, but if he works for a longer period of time, say more than a week, then the command changes hand (The Rialto Consultancy). Basically, rules are made in the balanced matrix in order to equalize the authority between both the functional and project managers. It is to provide a win/win scenario to both the leading parties. It overcomes the shortcomings of weak matrix and strong matrix, and instead becomes stable, hence the name ‘balanced matrix’. Advantages of Matrix Structure Being an employee in a matrix structure organization, I believe the following to be some advantages of a matrix organization. For a small project, being a project manager myself, I found that I was more easily able to access resources; there was an improved synchronization on shared technologies across the organization I was working in (Kerzner, 2009; The Rialto Consultancy); decentralized decisions made were more rapidly and promptly; and with people on my team from various backgrounds, I was able to have a varied range of skills and viewpoints from them. Moreover, I found development and expansion in our regional projects. With other departments following the same structure, I discovered that they were doing well in global projects as well. With people having worked on several projects, they also develop on their skills and gain more exposure (The Rialto Consultancy); with this they become better prepared to carry on different projects (Daft, 2009). They can increase on their depth of knowledge by having professional development and career progression (The Rialto Consultancy). Moreover there is improved communication and harmonization across the business (Kerzner, 2009). Furthermore, there is also an enhanced equilibrium between time, cost and performance (Project Management Training & resources, 2010; The Rialto Consultancy). The matrix structure is flexible in nature; I was able to create teams, change them, and even dissolve them without a major problem. The structure, I observed, also increased the motivation of individual employees (Kerzner, 2009). The achievement of goals used to bring them a sense of commitment and satisfaction. Other than this, the structure provides training in functional and general management skills. People within functional departments receive technical training, and team coordination provides the opportunity to develop a general perspective. More importantly, conflicts are minimal and mostly easily resolved; stress in finely distributed among the team (The Rialto Consultancy). Disadvantages of Matrix Structure It is typically believed that a matrix structure solves all the organizational problems. However, it is a misconception that needs to be fixed. As an organization is more dependent on the people that are working, who make a certain organizational setting a success or a failure, hence it is important to focus more on the human resources. Disadvantages include workers being pulled in so many directions by multiple reporting lines and competing priorities (Kerzner, 2009). Moreover, productive time is lost to innumerable meetings and discussions which do not prove to be fruitful for a project in the long run (Daft, 2009). It becomes an expensive and frustrating way to work when people are in multiple locations. Besides, too much cooperation will only build on socialization among employees and actual work usually falls behind. Furthermore, project managers (especially those who are fresh) tend to focus too much on the structure of the matrix and too little on the new people management skills that the structure needs. As discussed earlier, the structure itself does not solve anything, rather what make the matrix work, are matrix management skills which are imperative to be learnt and practiced by managers in order to run the team as well as execute the project effectively. Otherwise the whole thing could be mismanaged and turn out disastrous. Also, too much information sharing wastes employees time in attending meetings which are mostly unrelated to their tasks and duties when instead they could be doing some work on the job and bringing out results (Daft, 2009). Other than this, people get frustrated from receiving instructions (on conferences, meetings, emails etc) time and again and this reflects when they fail to produce quality work on time. Too much poor quality communication becomes a problem, not the solution. Moreover, workers get really confused as to whom they should be reporting for what, i.e. there is dual authority (Daft, 2009; Portny, 2010; Kerzner, 2009; The Rialto Consultancy). Matrix implementations go too far down the organization and create additional complexity for little value; the structure gets very complex at times. Having to report to multiple bosses creates frustration and potential conflicts (Kerzner, 2009). Global account management is a big step up in complexity from managing national accounts. Global account teams need to operate across national and corporate cultures and master matrix, virtual and remote team-working. At times, it gets hard for the project managers to determine the return on communication technology investment. If people do not have the skills to use technology properly then it can be boring and lack participation. But the problem is not the technology; it is how employees use it. Hence, project managers have to stay prudent for the immense costs on a project going to waste which eventually becomes a great disadvantage for managers. Instead of a hierarchical culture, matrix structure requires a collegial culture (The Rialto Consultancy). References Daft, R. L. (2009) “Organization theory and Design”, Cengage Learning, pp. 110 Keizner, H. (2009) “Project Management: A Systems Approach to Planning, Scheduling, and Controlling, Wiley, pp. 110 Portny, S. E. (2010) “Project Management for Dummies” pp. 191 Price, A. (2007) “Human Resource Management in a Business Context”, 3rd ed. Pp. 184-187 Project Management Course (2008) “Matrix Organizational Structure – History and Styles” [Online] Accessed 10th May from: http://www.project-management-course.info/matrix-organizational-structure-history-and-styles/ Project Management Training and Resources (2010) “Matrix Organization and Project Management” [Online] Accessed 10th May from http://www.visitask.com/matrix-organization.asp The Rialto Consultancy, Rialto Report: Successfully Operating in Matrix Organizations [Online] Accessed 12th May 2010 from http://www.rialtoconsultancy.com/pdfs/reports/Successfully%20Operating%20Matrix%20Management.pdf Read More