Best ways to maximise work efficiency and achieve perfect interpersonal harmony in a matrix "multiple bosses" org structure - A) If you are one of the bosses, B) If you are the subordinate
Good Answers (1)
Will P
Non-Profit Executive, Management Consultant, & Non-Profit Board Member
Best Answers in: Organizational Development (7), Change Management (5), Non-profit Management (3), Computers and Software (2), Government Services (1), Personnel Policies (1), Staffing and Recruiting (1), Corporate Law (1), Employment and Labor Law (1), Corporate Governance (1), Social Enterpreneurship (1), Manufacturing (1), Career Management (1)
The reality answer (i.e., not very helpful, I’m afraid) is short: Properly implement a matrix organization culture.
Disclaimer: I agree with Michelle Carter to the extent that matrix implementations in the real world rarely are functioning correctly--this is what causes the lack of "interpersonal harmony" and "multiple bosses" problem. Having said that, let’s at least take a look at the theory (you can decide where you want to go from there).
Implementing a matrix organization (assuming that it's justified) takes more than just shuffling the organization chart or establishing a "product" based structure to overlay over an existing "functional" structure. The concept requires an internal discipline that will go against the grain of just about any existing organizational culture--in other words, you've got a major culture change project on your hands (and this will be true even in a start-up--there just aren't many people out there who are experienced with a properly-functioning matrix organization).
So what's missing in most matrix implementations? A clear delineation of who's responsible for what and the discipline to maintain those boundaries. What are the responsibilities in a matrix organization? First, let’s review the concept and its assumptions:
Assumptions: A functionally-organized company maximizes skill development and enforcement of standards/regulations. A product-line-organized (or process-organized or value-chain-organized, or whatever you prefer) company maximizes production effectiveness (for either goods or services). A matrix organization can maximize both skills/standards and production effectiveness.
Concept: In a matrix organization, the skill-based personnel (i.e., non-managerial) are part of the product-line (process, value chain) team and are responsible to the team’s manager for their performance in fulfilling the team’s goals. Simultaneously, the functional manager is responsible for training and monitoring the skill development and standards/regulatory compliance of the skill-based personnel who are within his functional area, regardless of what production team they are on.
Reality issues that block effective implementation of a matrix organization (and result in the problems implied in your question):
* The product-line manager blocks participation in training for the skills-based personnel on his team and/or overrides standards/regulatory compliance practices and decisions.
* The functional manager tries to direct the work of the skills-based personnel rather than just monitoring their effectiveness and standards/regulatory compliance and/or schedules skills training without coordinating with the product-line manager well in advance (and usually without a backup plan in case the schedule is “overcome by events”).
* No one knows who is responsible for the skills-based personnel performance reviews, merit awards, or promotions. (I’d vote for the product-line manager for the first two, but the functional manager for the third—but that’s just me.)
* The senior manager who is over both the product-line manager and the functional manager just lets the shenanigans go on, rather than exercising his responsibility for managing the interface of the two functions (i.e., ensuring that both “play by the rules”).
There’s a lot more detail than that, obviously, or else this would be much easier than it actually is, but that’s pretty much the 5000-foot overview. I’ll bet that when you look at your own organization, you’ll see most or all of the issues I’ve outlined above. If you’re the chief executive of the organization, and if your company’s processes really can benefit from a matrix structure, then you can fix this (provided you have the expertise, the will, and the support of your directors). If you’re not, just accept that you’re part of a dysfunctional organization, and try to find your peace and happiness in life off the job (or find a job with a less-dysfunctional company).
More Answers (7)
Ravi K
Sales and Marketing professional
Best Answers in: Using LinkedIn (6), Starting Up (3), Mentoring (2), Business Development (2), Ethics (2), Staffing and Recruiting (1), Treaties, Agreements and Organizations (1), Advertising (1), Customer Relationship Management (1), Retirement and Estate Planning (1), Web Development (1)
Hi Manish,
If one is the subordinate who has multiple bosses
A. One should not get into grapevine effect..
B. Be politically correct (It could hurt any of the greycells of " one " of the bosses.)
C Align your work process as per the demands in a matrix for the multiple bosses..Try sticking to the matrix.
D. Sit and discuss and make each one of the bosses feel important and know what they really want
E. Talk much as you can with either of bosses to understand their work deadlines and how they want to process deadlines/daily routines
F. Avoid a 360 degrees feedback unless it is respected and bosses understand the end use of it.
G. Avoid talking about the bosses infront of anyone..You never know who the " Grapevine Guru " sits in the lunchroom with you...he could be your best peer but could be the most familiar grapevine AGENT to any of your bosses.
H. Make your team feel relaxed...They are the ones who will never understand the dynamics that you would be going through...They should be the ones who should be strong, determined and willing to accept change in process with ease...Most important should work on your process culture as laid down for this multiple bosses environment.
I. If your think one of the bosses is intolerable inspite of you giving your best...If you performance can be quantified align yourself with the boss whom you in comfort with the right HR/Management Committee/Dept head/CEO intervention...Performers can always choose.
If you are one of the bosses for the team who has another vertical reportings
1. Make the team/indvidual feel important
2. Take a 360 appraisal from time to time
3. Take him/her or the team out on informal lunches/Dinner once a month atleast so that you can discuss out of the box questions
4. Every team member is hungry for respect and accolades...I think if one can give them these things spl ones who are deserving....bulls eye
5. I feel helping and counselling someone geniunely is very critical..Someone who is stuck inbetween the devil and the blue sea needs guidance, comfort, active support...Give him/her or the team what they really want.
6. Praise your team in front of othes...this will ensure people talk about them in good spirit and the other bosses will always keep these small things in mind and not take for granted..
7. Analyse and test the SWOT of the team and give them feedback so that they can improve..
8. Yes if you can influence your peer whom the team is also reporting in matrix to sit with the team for a interactive session...Nothing better works in a teamwork spirit...
9. Remember their birthdays, marriage anniv etc and do take out time to wish them or cut a cake...geniuine feelings are the most reciprocated ones
I feel smart, hardworking & dedicated people in any stage can sail through with a small amount of patience, adjustment and willingness to adopt.Today you support someone tommorow he/she will support the chain...This will go on anon.
I sincerely feel & have learnt that people work for people rather than brands or company names..
Warm Regards
Ravi Kikan
Ricardo A
Strategy researcher //randorinho@gmail.com//
Best Answers in: Organizational Development (1), Branding (1)
It depends on:
1- On the goals of each person involved in the process.
2 - Organizational culture. Everything is posible if... everything is simple, trusted and well communicated...
3- People respecting the structure, the system and have confidence in his own way of labor.
In my opinion there's no best ways. There is the best way. This best way is achived by sharing knowledge and thoughts, and understanding what are the needs of those persons that together are a TEAM.
- Boss can be a good one if the subordinate understands why he is the boss.
- Subordinate can be a good one if boss understands why he needs a subordinate and respect him like a human.
There is a common variable between the boss and the subordinate. Both are human.
Hope to help...
Regards,
Ricardo
Michelle Malay C
Consultant, Author, Blogger - Talent Assessment, Leadership, Organizational Design, Embedding Values into Operations
Best Answers in: Corporate Governance (1), Organizational Development (1)
Manish,
Multiple bosses is anything but efficient, and they are blatantly unfair and stress inducing. The involved parties will spend more time managing the relationships than they will getting work done.
A manager, by definition, is one who is accountable for the output of others (his direct reports). When more than one person is ultimately accountable for anything or anyone, the door is open to buck passing and conflict.
It is reasonable for an employee to do work for more than one person, but the employee should always ultimately report to one person. That person, his manager, can authorize his employee to do specific tasks or project work for others, but at the end of the day the manager and only the single manager should be accountable for the employee.
Managers are accountable for assigning tasks, prioritizing, and monitoring the workload of their employees. If more than one person has the ability to assign tasks, conflict and confusion will reign. One boss could have the employee working on a large project that takes nearly all his time (and interest), and the other boss, may become resentful and give the employee demerits for poor time management. What will that do for engagement?
When it comes time for performance appraisals, whose opinion will count? What happens when one boss says, you spend too much time planning, and the other says, you need to do more planning?
Matrix organizations are a petri dish for dysfunction. My advice, stay away from them.
Regards,
Michelle Malay Carter
Links:
Gurprriet S
Specialist at Leading Change, Leading Innovation, Leadership Development and Organization Development
Best Answers in: Organizational Development (6), Change Management (4), Business Development (2), Education and Schools (1), Mentoring (1), Venture Capital and Private Equity (1), Manufacturing (1), Using LinkedIn (1)
Manish
In my experience, the biggest strife and confusion in a Matrix organization is not caused at the vertical level i.e. Supervisor - Direct Report, it is caused because of horizontal conflict.
2 bosses who are unclear about where one's role boundary ends and the others' begins end up causing havoc at the lower levels.
What is needed is as follows:
Management team of a matrix organization has to sit down and discuss role boundaries, discuss grey areas and how they will handle them. For example if there is an area where we're both grey, what should we do? Ans - We should pick up the phone or shoot an email or meet and have a quick chat around how we'll respond, who'll pick up the ball. After a few months of this, everyone is comfortable and boundary conditions and guiding principles are largely arrived at, and little needs to be done in the manner of checking
If the above works, then you're set.
"The slave that has three masters is a free man." (old Roman proverb). The purpose of matrix is usually to get different units to cooperate. I have worked for 15 years mainly as a manager in international industries. The turf wars and inefficiencies I have seen at close hand are staggering.
For many years I have seen matrixes as a consultant coming from the outside. I am surprised that so many still are promoting matrixes instead of finding softer ways of getting people to talk and cooperate.
As the Roman proverb suggests the subordinate can keep him/herself busy doing the wrong stuff and neither manager realizes what is going on. The subordinate needs to be held accountable by only one manager. But the formalia and soft stuff regulating cooperation with others needs to be in place and be one of the accountabilities.
You must enforce open communication with each boss, clearly understand the paramenters they set and build strong and close relationships with each one. T
This has worked for me in most cases. As long as there is mutual respect it usually works out considerably well.
There are some disadvantages but you can mimimize them with a good communication base.
I wish you all the best!
Eric K
Product Manager (AutoForm Solutions) at AutoForm Engineering
Best Answers in: Travel Tools (2), Budgeting (1)
A person should only have one BOSS.
We are currently in the process of rolling out such a structure and it is painfuI. have instead been trying to get our teams to recognize the difference between being a process manager and a personnel manager. Most of the time org's that find themselves with the more bosses than staff it is because they never make this distinction.
Try making the organization such that teams or groups do only have one true reporting structure, but identify the internal customers (these are those other bosses recast). Your boss will measure you on how well you serve the internal customers, your boss will fight for your rights with the internal customers, he is the hammer and the shield as necessary.
Additionally, it clarifies many of the ways to handle recognition issues and such if the customer structure is run just like the business for external customers. and puts proper value on the "borrowed resources".