Introduction
The matrix structure is a management technique which diverts from the conventional manner of managing talent in the workplace. Often, the concept is applied throughout the organization, but there are cases where only part of the organization can be managed in this manner (Ford, 1992, p. 1).
What is unique about the matrix concept is that, there are several reporting channels to the top management, as opposed to the conventional one channel of reporting. In the past, many organizations were known to dissect employee talent according to employee product association or functional levels.
However, the matrix structure combines the two platforms to create a dual reporting system. The matrix technique therefore works by integrating cross-functional work teams in the sense that, employees now report to various sections of a company’s top managerial team (Kuprenas, 2003, p. 52).
The entire concept of matrix management was derived from a diagrammatic form of organizational management where there is a grid of functions and product groups bound to be accomplished by selected employee groups (Samson and Daft, 2009).
The matrix concept is normally adopted where there are sophisticated products to be developed and the input of various departments ought to be incorporated to make the project a success.
However, there have been increased concerns among managerial circles that, the matrix concept creates more problems than it can solve. This concern is registered because from the dual reporting system which the matrix structure incorporates, organizational design is complicated.
This study focuses on the matrix structure as the first part of the study and in the second part of the study, an analysis of the concept of teamwork will be made. An analysis of the matrix structure will be done to establish why the matrix concept is weak in applicability and in the second part of the study; this study explains why most managers today adopt the concept of teamwork
Applicability of the Matrix Concept
Though the matrix structure has been advanced as a formalized way of making the organizational design process efficient, it also creates new problems for organizations which adopt the concept. In this regard, the matrix concept exposes a lot of weaknesses in its application, such that, it sometimes beats the sense of adopting it in the first place.
The dual reporting structure of the matrix concept is the major element of crisis for the concept because it exposes organizations to a lot of problems regarding the applicability of the concept.
For instance, the dual reporting system envisioned in the concept is very costly for organizations to implement and therefore this affects the productivity of the concept (Clegg, Kornberger and Pitsis, 2005). More importantly, this problem is severe for organizations which are just starting up because they may lack the funds to bounce back into operations once they suffer severe operational losses.
Through the dual reporting structure, the matrix concept creates a complex reporting system which causes a lot of confusion in the organization regarding which individual or department employees should report to. The chain of command is therefore distorted with the adoption of the matrix structure and chances of role ambiguity surfacing is high (Gottlieb, 2007, p. 2).
This situation is likely to brew more conflict for organizations and especially individuals who hold high positions. This conflict is observed in form of interpersonal conflict because the matrix structure pits two individuals against one other (because employees report to both of them).
Chances of superiority battles occurring is therefore high and employees may find themselves caught up in the middle of the standoff since they may find themselves in a position where they have to pledge loyalty to a certain individual.
For instance, a project manager may tell an employee to do one thing but another manager in a different department may tell the employee to do another thing which contravenes the first instruction.
This situation may corrode employee cohesion and reduces the synergy needed in completing given projects. It is therefore no surprise that, companies which have shifted their organizational designs from the conventional form to the matrix form experience high employee turnover as a result (Kuprenas, 2003, p. 53).
The shortcomings of the matrix structure have also been practically evidenced in the United States (US) (in 1961-1978) when a quarter of the hospitals shifted their organizational designs to the matrix structure and later abandoned it after citing operational problems.
At this point, several research studies were done to analyze why the concept was failing and it was discovered that, the matrix concept was more suited for larger organizations as opposed to smaller ones (Willmott, 2010, p. 114).
However, this turned out not to be the case because subsequent studies done in General Motors (which is a large organization) revealed that, the concept was still not applicable because it was affirmed that, managers lost control of their departments, thereby decreasing productivity and efficiency.
Teamwork
Organizations have in the recent past greatly utilized the concept of teamwork in organizational processes. Teams are independent groups of people who work towards the achievement of a given organizational goal.
The trend has picked up in the recent past because recent research findings show that, teamwork is an efficient way of getting organizational objectives done within a short time (Parker, 2008, p. 183).
The efficiency of teamwork has motivated more managers to nurture the concept because researchers who have past experiences in the use of the concept, acknowledge that, decisions are easily made in this regard and undertaking simple processes like encouraging employees to be more productive can significantly lead to a lot of improvements in the production process.
Some companies also use teams because it is a simple way of controlling the behaviors of employees. For instance, when employees work in teams, they feel obligated to ensure the success of the team at all costs and many would often not want to be singled out as the derailing cause in a given team.
For instance, if an employee falls sick, chances are that, he or she will struggle to come to work so that, he or she is not identified as the weak link in the team. This observation is a form of positive peer influence in the sense that, positive energies from team members are likely to spread to other team members as well.
The uptake of the concept of teamwork among organizations is also motivated by the fact that, with team working, the organization can be able to integrate different talents towards the success of a given project.
For instance, not every employee possesses the same skill or talent and therefore, it is only wise to integrate the different talents of team member towards the realization of a given organizational goal. This fact is closely similar to the concept of building synergy because teamwork easily leads to the success of the concept.
Synergy appreciates the fact that, two talents are better than one and the integration of different employee talent is more productive than if employees were to work individually (Parker, 2008, p. 183).
This concept also changes the management’s view of the organization because employees are now perceived as part of an entire segment of an organization as opposed to individual people. Teamwork therefore helps to build synergy in this manner and managers appreciate its productivity as a result.
For instance, an airport controller would find his job very difficult if he were not to embrace the concept of teamwork because controlling different airline companies to offer maximum service satisfaction to hundreds of customers is not an easy thing.
For example: coordinating the checking of luggage; passenger alighting; cabin cleaning; replenishment of foods, drinks and snacks; airplane fuel refilling; luggage unloading and similar activities are tedious tasks.
The adoption of the concept of teamwork is therefore useful in helping such an individual effectively handle such a hustle because through the adoption of teamwork, the airport controller will be able to speed up all the processes, say, if he adds two or more people in the luggage checking department as opposed to only four people, or if he adds more flight attendants to communicate with the pilot in times of landing or take off.
Conclusion
In light of the weaknesses of the matrix approach, many organizations have changed their perception (especially held in the 70s) that, the matrix structure is an antidote for all organizational design problems because the breadth of its potential for applicability significantly reduced as a result.
However, the notion that, the matrix structure is appropriate for large organizations exists because it is believed that, large organizations operating in a fast-paced business environment may benefit more from the organizational design strategy than companies which do not share the same nature.
In the same regard, it is correct to say that, a coal mining company is not likely to benefit from the concept (matrix) as opposed to a company dealing in pharmaceutical products.
Also, companies which do not heavily rely on the services of professionals or semi-professionals are likely to fail to benefit from the concept because the technique is best applied when an organization relies on the services of professionals such as engineers, surveyors and the likes.
The matrix technique is also only applicable in an organization which has a diverse set of professionals who have various skills and in organizations which have nurtured employee behavior such that, the interpersonal skill level is high.
However, getting organizations which have attained this level of employee cohesion is normally difficult. Also, for the concept to effectively works, there needs to be sufficient authority given to project managers who work under the authority of the functional and product managers to make important decisions regarding the course various projects have to take.
Considering these dynamics of the matrix concept, the matrix technique is applied best as part of a large inclusive strategy of organizational design, but it should not be left alone to stand as the only unique organizational design strategy.
With regards to the teamwork concept applied by many organizations today, organizational managers have discovered that, it is easier to foster collaboration and cohesion in the organization through teamwork so that, tasks can be effectively completed in the organization.
Managers also aim to improve their employee’s problem solving skills in the organization because working in teams is also strenuous and employees are bound to disagree with one another regarding various issues. The team environment however encourages them to solve their disputes and iron out their differences.
This improves their problem solving skills. Moreover, the team environment encourages employees to come up with creative ideas which they can brainstorm among themselves and ultimately, the organization will be the one to benefit because such creative ideas are likely to be of benefit to them.
References
Clegg, S., Kornberger, M., & Pitsis, T. (2005). Managing and Organizations: An Introduction to Theory and Practice. London: Sage.
Ford, R. (1992). Cross-Functional Structures: A Review and Integration of Matrix Organization and Project Management. Journal of Management, 6, 1-22.
Gottlieb, M. (2007). The Matrix Organization Reloaded: Adventures in Team And Project Management. London: Greenwood Publishing Group.
Kuprenas, J. (2003). Implementation and Performance of a Matrix Organization Structure. International Journal of Project Management, 21, 50-62.
Parker, G. (2008). Team Players and Team Work: New Strategies for Developing Successful Collaboration. London: John Wiley and Sons.
Samson, D., & Daft, R. (2009). Management Third Asia Pacific Edition. Australia: Cengage Learning.
Willmott, H. (2010). Organization Theory and Design. London: Cengage Learning.