Debating the Organization Structure

Filed under: HRD, Management — Mukul Gupta at 1:44 pm on Saturday, April 21, 2007

The evening of 19th April was different at our HQ in Kolkata. There was a gathering some senior executives in the CEO’s office where I ran a presentation on the proposal of restructuring the organization. The gathering also included some tehnical leads from our organization. The main idea was to get as many different views as possible. Here is a brief of that:

The current organization structure

In our current structure all authority and responsibilities lies with the functional heads; the structure is created by having separate departments such as Design, PHP, SEO. 

This structure is not “pure devil” and it does have benefits like: 

  • It is simple and easy to understand
  • Coordination across groups is left to the functional heads
  • The organization overhead is low
  • The career progression is clear
  • Birds of a feather are flocking together 

Disadvantages of this structure? 

  • Coordination across departments on project that requires multiple type of specialization is poor
  • “CYA” is easy, as the blame can be put on other departments.
  • Separation of “management” and “technical” discipline is not there.
  • No body is having the full-time job of managing projects and thinking about customer. 

Organizing by project teams 

This will mean creating a structure that comprises of independent, self-sufficient project teams that exist autonomously within organization. This team will be assembled for a specific project under a project manager. The team will be temporary in nature and its member will be reallocated when the project is complete. 

The project will be organized primarily around the project manager, and then a project team is formed. The project manager exercises direct and autonomous control over the various discipline groups and is responsible for the coordination and monitoring of the effort of the team. 

Benefits of this: 

  • Flexibility in allocation of resources
  • Responsibility for project delivery lies with one person who is clearly identified
  • Senior management is free from managing the project as there is now a full time project manager taking care of this. Thus, senior management can focus on Strategy etc. 

Disadvantages of this structure 

  • Growth of individual technical skills for a team is not possible or very difficult
  • The administrative overhead is very high in managing the resources when they are not allocated to a project
  • Leverages exclusively on the project manager for delivery
  • The managers may get overloaded with excess inflow of projects. 

The Alternative? Best of both worlds i.e. Matrix Structure
           
In this structure the staff and resources that are required by the project manager are not permanently assigned to the project, but are obtained from a pool controlled and monitored by a functional head. People that are required to perform specific functions in a particular project are allocated as necessary and after their job is done they will be returned to the control of functional head for reassignment. 

The members of the project team and their functional supervisors will have the responsibility for timely completion of allocated task within acceptable quality limits and they will report to both project manager and the functional heads. 

Advantages of the creating a matrix organization 

  • It has the benefits of both structures i.e. (current functional organization and project team structure).
  • Allows for just-in-time allocation of resources based on problem at hand.
  • The project personnel can retain “belongingness” with their functional team and still be accountable for projects as well.
  • Allows independent growth in technology and management skills
  • The customer relations can be better with having SPOC throughout project lifecycle
  • Projects can be controlled better
  • Profit margins on the project can be higher as resources having the right skills are allocated for the job instead of just having one person to do the entire thing which may require learning or rework
  • Allows projects to be technically brilliant along with being well managed 

Disadvantages of the matrix organization 

  • There is a potential for conflict between functional vs. project groups.
  • The administrative overhead is higher
  • Increase in managerial overhead
  • A person may be shifted across projects very frequently which may lead to insecurity. 

So, what’s the conclusion?
Well, to be honest after hours of debate, we are yet to reach one! I will keep everybody posted on what is finally decided.

6 Comments »

Comment by David Meggitt

April 24, 2007 @ 7:12 pm

Good points and an ongoing area of difficulty.

Matrix management never really worked…having two bosses is a problem.

Consider instead the thinking behind value networks as applied to project management. Look under Articles of the site www.value-networks.com - Will The Real Project Please Stand Up. This is now published.

Also have a looks at how projects help organisations become fit for purpose. http://tinyurl.com/2z3ok9

David Meggitt
www.meggittbird.net
UK

Comment by Frank Kanu

April 24, 2007 @ 9:56 pm

The most important question seems unanswered:
Why do you want to restructure?

Do the employees stand behind a restructure? How will the restructure influence the business?

What do the customers think?

Comment by Marieke Hensel

April 24, 2007 @ 11:55 pm

Thanks for this overview! I have to get the structure down for our new company and this really helps me. As you already give a good overview of advantages and disadvantages.

BTW, our company will go in the direction of organizing by project teams. Because it is flexible and brings the energy in a project because they choose for one project or another.

Marieke Hensel
www.henselhosting.com
The Netherlands

Comment by Mukul Gupta

April 25, 2007 @ 3:22 pm

Hello Frank,

Thanks a lot for writing!

In order to compete effectively, we want to ensure that as an organization we mature both in the technical as well as managerial discpline.

Moreover, with the implementation of CMMI it is apparent that seperating the project management and engineering discpline makes more sense. We have seen that some of our best developers are simply not interested in trying to learn formal project management disclipline and some of our best managers dont want to learn about engineering process areas within the CMMI model.

There is definetely room for both these types of people and we want offer them seperate career path. Thus, I think this seperation is a win/win model.

This model will also help our current functional heads to look beyond project pressure to new areas of improvement which I think will add a lot of dynamism to the company.

Mukul Gupta

Comment by Mukul Gupta

April 25, 2007 @ 3:28 pm

Hello Marieke,

I think as small organization, division by projects make lot of sense. We evolved that way too but later on some 5 years back, we selected the functional organization structure in order to promote technical growth.

We thought of implementing organization by projects, but for a size of a company with 200 employees where more than 50 simultaneous projects are running, it sounded like a difficult proposition. Moreover, it still does not helps us address the technical growth of the organization seperately from project management. For instance, how do we ensure that we are better at PHP technologies today then last day or we will be better tomorrow than today? Unless, someone is made accountable for it, chances of this happening is very less.

The easiest and most logical think to do, is too form a seperate project management office as it calls for least amount of modification in the existing structure.

Mukul Gupta

Comment by yudhvir singh

March 7, 2008 @ 5:16 pm

I need to design a project management structure for a BPO firm in india writing content for company websites. Please give me leads. Where do I start?

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>