matrix management

The Matrix Management Environment.
When calling on a variety of resources, often from various departments, projects are operating in a matrix management environment. This is a descriptive term for the management environment where projects cut across organizational boundaries and involve staff required to report to their own line manager as well as to the project manager. This is not a radical departure from traditional hierarchical management; indeed the traditional vertical management structure is still in place but is enhanced by temporary horizontal structures representing each project. The diagram shown illustrates the reporting structures that may result in an organization that is running multiple projects.

Ensure Effective Communication.
Matrix management relies on cooperation and communication between everyone involved. Whilst in a pure project environment, the decision-making authority rests with the project manager; in a matrix environment all major decisions will be reached by consensus. A satisfactory working arrangement needs to be reached that bridges the inevitable differences in priority that will exist between project managers and line managers. Project managers will tend to view their own project as the focal point whereas departmental managers will tend to view things from a departmental perspective. To function effectively matrix management environments should have the following characteristics: There should be effective channels of communication between the managers involved. All of the relevant line managers should contribute to project planning and project resource decisions should be reached by consensus. There should be formal procedures in place for resolving any management conflicts that do arise. Project staff should feel committed to the project as well as to their own department. In an ideal world the project manager would have little more to do than plan the project, secure the agreement of the line managers to deliver their pieces of the jigsaw on time and within budget, and then sit back and let it all happen. The real world is usually very different.

Project & Line Managers.
Project managers often fail to realize the many and varied demands placed on the line managers - who may find themselves in a position where the demand for their resources cannot be adequately met. Line managers have finite resources at their disposal and often have to juggle these in such a way as to ‘satisfy most of the demand for most of the time’. They often have numerous deadlines, relating to both departmental work in progress as well as to each project that they are supplying resources to. They have to accommodate unexpected resource shortages due to absenteeism and staff turnover. Projects in progress may be subject to changes, following the agreement and commitment of the line resources required and these will have important implications for the line managers. It is human nature for requests to be 'over prioritized' as individual project managers try to ensure that they get the best resources available. A failure to achieve the expected progress in any area of work may have a knock-on effect on the ability of the line manager to supply the resources they are committed to.

Commitment & Cooperation.
Project based working involves the efforts of a group of people dedicated to achieving a specific goal. A series of factors will contribute to the success of the project: The appointment of project leaders at all levels who are committed to the project and respected by the team. A shared belief in what the team is trying to achieve, together with a constant focus on the goals. A willingness to negotiate with those outside of the team; for the benefit of the project. The single most important factor in determining the success of the team is constant referral to the question "What are we trying to achieve?" It is all too easy for teams to lose sight of the overall aim of the project.

Project Sub-divisions.
Every project should be placed under the overall control of a single project manager. Large or complex projects may well be divided into a number of sub-projects and
sub-project managers can then be used to control them. The division of a project into sub-projects is the responsibility of the project owner, who should work closely with the overall project manager when determining this. Sub-projects are often defined in terms of discrete areas of work, which can be allocated to sub-project managers with relevant expertise. In this example, the project manager has retained direct managerial control over sub-projects A & B, as well as overall control of the project.

However, the direct managerial control over sub-projects C & D, have been allocated to a single sub-project manager. In a more complex project environment each of these sub-projects could have been placed under the control of different sub-project managers. The use of sub-project managers enables a wide variety of management structures to be imposed on any given project. This series of courses share a common theme of being based on project scenarios that justify division into sub-projects. However, projects are often smaller and more straightforward, making this sub-division unnecessary. Where this is the case, all responsibilities assigned to the sub-project manager should be undertaken by the project manager themselves, who may then decide to delegate some of these to task leaders. It is important not to make the organization of your project more complicated than necessary. You should apply the organizational framework detailed in this course in as streamlined a way as your project allows.

Using Appropriate Structures.
Later in this course three major project management roles will be described in some detail; the project manager, sub-project manager and task leader. The appointment of any or all of these positions should be made entirely with reference to the needs of the project. In the smallest of projects both the roles and responsibilities of all three of these roles could be undertaken by a single project manager. Even though all three roles could be combined within one individual the demands placed on this individual may still not justify a full-time position. At the other extreme some projects can be enormous in scope, complexity and duration. The building of the Channel Tunnel, as one of the largest civil engineering projects in history, involved scores of project management staff, covering all three of the roles outlined. The Channel Tunnel results were by no means atypical of such large scale and complex projects. Despite the bringing together of the best engineers, designers and project management experts available the project did suffer from significant delays and overspend. The inescapable conclusion is that to maximize the opportunities for success, projects and their corresponding management structures should be run by staff who can show a good track record in projects of a similar size and nature.

TOP <PREVIOUS NEXT>