Thanks, Phil. Great ideas and I shall share with my clients and let
them know of your contribution.
Aaron
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: [MG-ED-DV] Matrix Organization: Operationalizing the dot
Author: Management Education and Development Discussion
<
MG-ED-DV@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU> at MTMETM04
Date: 5/21/98 9:06 PM
Aaron,
We have been successfully implementing and practising such processes for
over ten years now and what follows is based on our experience here and
overseas:
First of all I should say that I am both a lecturer and academic director
with the University of New England and a consultant. So, if the following
seems like I am trying to sell my services - then I probably am. But it
makes interesting reading nevertheless.
By inference, a matrix organisation has a number of functions grouped
within their area of speciality - eg, engineers, accounting,
administration, technical, sales etc. Here the organisational structure is
flatter and middle management is virtually done away with.
When work is carried out that was formerly the domain of middle-management
(under the old hierarchical organisation) it is most often undertaken by
project teams made up of representatives from the appropriate groups - either
on full or part time - brought together under a project or team leader. In
fact most work within such organisations is carried out on a team-based basis
with a project or team leader supported by project coordinator/s and team
members - again, either on a full or part time basis. This is a simple view
of self-directed or self-led teams.
The work the people do here is more closely aligned with organisational
goals and objectives because the objective of the project (or task or
whatever you want to call it) is aimed directly at achieving the bigger
objective - ie, the organisation's objectives. So, with that in mind, the
competencies (individual skills and knowledge and the way they are applied)
required of the people on these teams are themselves aligned with the needs
of the organisation and not of the job they are doing - nor even of the job
they may have been recruited for however long ago. Such competencies are
developed based on the skills and knowledge required of each function
within the matrix hierarchy - ie, call them what you like but there is a
function that is responsible for all other functions, there are 'entry
level' functions, there are functions that supervise these 'entry level'
functions, there are functions (or a function) that manages the
supervisors, and so on. Collectively, these functions aim only to achieve
the goals and objectives of the organisation and in the past were called
jobs or positions. They are now called functions and what follows may help
to explain why.
Each function is defined in terms of what is required to achieve the
organisation's (or branch's) goals and objectives, and do so in a proactive
team environment. Entry into these functions is, obviously, by possession of
the desired competencies (to fill the function as a whole) and not simply by
the recruitment of a person that can do the job that is currently on the
boiler. (As an aside, if these competencies are correctly determined they
will include skills and knowledge to do the job that is 'currently on the
boiler' and any other job that comes along. This is known as being able to
transfer skills and knowledge to different situations and contexts.)
Now, as these functions will in your example be supporting the field
divisions, the competencies required to fill them must include the skills
and knowledge to provide such support. Similarly, the competencies required
to effectively operate in the field must include those that relate to
working back to the 'mother ship' (so to speak). Again, the competencies
must include those that show the individual or team acting in a proactive
and supportive manner with a view to achieving the organisation's overall
goals and objectives.
So, how are these functions and competencies defined? By starting off first
of all with a blank piece of paper and a clear understanding of what the
organisation's goals and objectives are. All of the functions (note
'functions', not jobs) required to achieve the organisation's goals and
objectives are then drawn onto the paper and an analysis is carried out to
determine the skills and knowledge necessary to effectively fill that
function. Once these have been determined it is a simple matter to look at
the organisation as it now is, see where there are overlaps between existing
jobs and those viewed as essential to the achievement of the organisation's
goals and objectives, and develop a plan to analyse whether or not the
people currently holding those overlapping position have the skills and
knowledge required to effectively fill the function. Where they don't (we
call this a competency-based assessment and I would be very surprised if,
after such an analysis has been carried out, there is anyone who can't now
adequately fulfil the requirements of the function) a training or
development program is instituted to bring them up to the required level.
Where there are gaps between the number of functions and the people
available to fill them, then a recruitment or staff development program
(internal promotion) is instituted. Where there are people who have the
desired skills and knowledge but aren't sure how to apply them, then a
performance appraisal and review system is instituted. Where there are
people vying for higher or more challenging jobs, then an education or
self-development program is instituted. Where there are too many people and
not enough functions then the organisation must make a decision as to what
its next step is - exactly as all organisations do now. Either retrain,
reinstate somewhere else, or remove.
To recap, a picture of the ideal organisation is developed (ideal being one
that has every position or function within it aiming to play its part in
achieving the organisation's goals and objectives), and the skills and
knowledge needed to fill this picture are defined. Once that is done a close
look is made at what currently exists and plans are developed to draw the
two together.
The above process has been developed out of the realisation that for too
long now we have been encouraging specialisations within the workforce and
in doing so have influenced the educators to such an extent that now too
many workers are too specialised - no-one is capable of expanding their
thinking and capability anymore. This approach not only determines what
must be needed to achieve the goals and objectives of each organisation, it
actively encourages such an approach because at the end of the day, it is
the people who will push the organisation to grow and achieve its goals,
not the organisation or the way it is structured.
We have successfully introduced this process to many large and small
organisations here and overseas. We do so at the professional level and use
the competencies required to effectively undertake and achieve projects as
the catalyst. If you want more information please give me a call on my email
address:
robnphil@ozemail.com.au
Phil Rutherford
At 11:43 21/05/98 EST, you wrote:
>One of my clients is interested in reinforcing the dotted lines relationship
>between the functional and the field divisions. The organization is new in
>practicing the matrix organizational structure. It considers that OD
processes
------------------------------------
P D Rutherford & Associates Pty Ltd
Competency-based systems specialists
61 2 6230 4823
robnphil@ozemail.com.au