Cost and Scheduling Basic

Posted: October 17th, 2013

Cost and Scheduling Basic

Name:

Course:

Institution:

Instructor:

Date:

Cost and Scheduling Basic

The sudden revolution in the introduction of new organizational structures is fed by a realization among managers that their organizations should embrace some form of dynamism in order to survive. These environmental factors that dictate their structural change arise from the increased competition, requirements for better usage of resources and technological changes. Each form that a company takes comes with its advantages and disadvantages. The matrix structure seeks to solve the issue of different teams working alongside together. The matrix structure combines projects or processes and departments such as marketing.

In their book, Grinnell and Apple illustrate reasons as to why the conventional structure may not suffice as adequate for managing projects. The management may be satisfied with the course of the technical workers, but the projects may not be meeting deadlines, objectives and cost requirements. The traditional specialists may feel exploited if subjected to a project-driven system. Another issue with the traditional structure is that departments may blame each other for failure to achieve goals or make delivery dates. Lastly, Grinnell and Apple state that the project may be on time but the staff may not be satisfied with their accomplishments (Sadler, 2011).

The matrix organizational form attempts to combine the benefits of the functional and the product organizational structures. This form is best for companies that have projects as their primary work description, for example, construction firms. The division of labour includes a project manager who will ensure that each project will be treated exclusively. This is because, for such firms, the project represents a prospective revenue center. The authority that is wielded by the project manager comes from the general manager. The project manager therefore becomes directly responsible for the success of the project. This form delegates works while maintaining the standards of any project.

The matrix form has several strong points that enable it to be the best structure to be adopted in solving organizational issues. Matrix forms encourage participants to focus ion one project; they facilitate horizontal and vertical communication as well as separating the horizontal line and allowing it to work independently for the sake of administrative reasons. These regulations form the conditions in which the benefits of the matrix form can be realized.

Application of the matrix form to project management

Project management that has an open or democratic layout can apply the matrix management that ensures the collaborative sharing of information is made mandatory, where several people may be working on the same piece of work. Within matrix management, the staff is encouraged to work in teams. Applying the matrix form to strictly project organizations will result in unsatisfactory outcomes as the final authority and decision-making rest in the project manager. Project management focuses on the coordinative role among superiors and subordinates. Therefore, in such settings, work is assigned to experts or departments who are expected to do things in the way they know best (Grinnell & Apple, 1975).

Discussions by Sadler mention that there are no good or bad organizational structures; the appropriateness differs according to each firm. The level of success of organization change depends on three factors for line management organizations and project-driven organizations. If the company is extremely sensitive to the environment, the management will be particularly strict in controlling the change process. The level of integration of a firm will also be considered as well as the external relationships with labor unions and such. However, it is evident that the best types of organizational structure that can apply the matrix form are the project management organizations.

References

Sadler P. (2011)”Designing an Organizational Structure,” Management International Review, Vol. 11, No. 6, 1971, pp. 19–33.

Grinnell S. K. and Apple H. (1975) “When Two Bosses Are Better Than One,” Machine Design, , pp. 84–87.