• Power or Organization Design
• Power of Strategic Alignment
• Power of Collaboration

Please feel free to forward this newsletter to others who would be interested in receiving it.

The Myth of the Matrix
This is the summer of The Matrix. Audiences are flocking to see the second movie in the series of stories centered in distorted reality with the impossible achieved by computer-generated "humans" who are expected to function skillfully and effectively within the digital framework imposed upon them.

What thrills movie audiences sends chills up the spines of organizational consultants. For us, the matrix can be a multi-headed monster that might look good on paper but more often than not doesn't perform effectively when turned loose on an organization. The reorg matrix panacea that's supposed to cure all ills and set the organization on the path to running smoothly, improve management of interdependencies, and enable effective business processes actually can wreak havoc between the lines of communication and command and on the morale and productivity of the people involved.

Clients often call me in after they have imposed a matrix on their operation and now find themselves in more trouble than they were originally. In many cases, the Marvel of the Matrix turns out to be a myth.

How the Matrix Works
In corporate settings, a matrix is an integrative design solution put in place to enhance organization integration and solve problems at the interfaces of organizations. It's also an exceedingly complex and difficult way to organize, and it's definitely not for the faint of heart.

Typically, the organization has identified competing or potentially colliding variables, interests, functions, or geographies that nevertheless have to work together effectively and efficiently. Matrix structures are frequently used in project management organizations, bringing together people from various functions to form project teams. Matrices are also used to insure that functional and/or geographic points of view and needs are represented in and that services are provided to line organizations. Dual reporting relationships are created to balance the power and potential for conflict and to provide both a forum and a process for addressing and resolving differences or other issues.

For instance, if you have a line organization that needs support, help or resources from functional organizations, you might name one functional person to sit on the staff of the line person. In the typical service organization, it might be a person from quality control, HR, or finance who is shared by a line person. On a cross-functional project team, the members report jointly to the project leader and their respective functional managers. Both the line and staff managers--and possibly others--contribute to the performance appraisal for this matrixed employee, which is another part of the equation. (We'll discuss the challenges of compensation in matrix organizations in a future newsletter.)

The matrix assumes that one of these managers--usually the line person--has slightly more than 50 percent of the authority and the other side has a bit less. The result is that a potentially uneven balance of power is minimized, resources are shared and managed based on organization needs, there is greater consistency, and increased collaboration. The benefit is that functional folks are conveying a point of view and skill set to other parts of the organization.

The Umbrella Requisite
If the matrix is going to work, there needs to be an umbrella big enough to shelter everyone, which means the organization has to have a common purpose and shared outcomes for which there is joint accountability. The umbrella has to be at corporate or division level so everyone who stands under it is given a lot of clarity about the organization's common goals and objectives, and this provides the glue that cements the matrix, drives collaboration, and motivates folks to work together effectively. Everyone is then striving for the big picture instead of maximizing his or her individual functions or agendas with total disregard for everyone else.

I believe a matrix can be a very helpful intervention, a way to minimize the design conflicts that typically surface in complex situations and organizations where high levels of interdependence exist--but only if it's done correctly. Unfortunately, when there's a lot of complexity and a high need for integration, someone will say, "Well, let's do a matrix." It morphs into a code word that means "This is a complicated situation, but if we call it a matrix, then folks will get the signal and sort it out for themselves."

How to Work a Matrix Successfully
There are definite issues an organization has to address and resolve if the matrix is going to work successfully. Here are seven of the most important things an organization's leaders must do.

1. Balance: They need to establish balance from three directions--among the team members, the managers of the functions from which they were drawn, and the team leader. What I encounter quite often is the situation in which the VPs or directors or managers haven't sorted out their conflicts ahead of time, so they get driven straight down into the organization. These unresolved problems are replicated at every level in the organization, and lower level people are then left to deal with the day-to-day manifestations and expected to figure it out. These folks usually lack the information, context, and authority--and sometimes the skill--to accomplish this. This is inappropriate and unfair . . . and uncomfortably common.

2. Commonality of Purpose: They need to establish common and/or complementary goals and objectives so at each point of interface down a matrixed organization, people find something to guide them, hold them together, and give them a rationale for working interdependently rather than trying to maximize their own particular functions.

3. Clarity: They need to get clarity at the inevitable points of competition. The more those can be identified and anticipated, with processes developed for how to deal with the conflict and the competition when they arise, the greater the likelihood that this kind of an organization--or any organization for that matter--would work successfully.

4. Willingness to Collaborate: Willingness, especially on the part of the highest-level managers on the two sides of the matrix, to give up what I call the "First Among Equals Game" is essential. This game is played by saying, "We're all in this together, we're all equal, we're all the same, and we're all buddy-buddy." But in reality one (or maybe both) of these executive staff members really believes that he/she is more important (smarter, more competent, etc.) than anyone else. With that undercurrent, the matrix rarely works because the "more equal" person tries to get more resources, authority, recognition, or whatever passes for coin of the realm in that group. Instead, both must be willing to work for whatever is in the best interests of the enterprise.

5. Trust: They need to engender trust in and among their people. More than any other factor, trust predicts the success of teams. Over the past ten or twelve years, I've seen trust erode in organizations, and no one wants to admit it or deal with it. Whether it's about today's speed, complexity, scarcity of resources, or compensation system construction, employee trust is gone and it's very hard to get management to be concerned about it. The result is diminished loyalty, increased conflict (that inevitably takes time and energy from other endeavors), and reduced morale and productivity.

6. Attention: They need to pay attention to internal problems and issues. Many managers seem to feel that if they just keep moving really fast, somehow these issues won't matter or they'll take care of themselves, or we'll get beyond them, and then we won't have to deal with them. It's alarming to see the inability or unwillingness to recognize that there's a cumulative effect to blowing by the obvious problems when various aspects of organizations aren't working.

7. Time: They need to invest a sufficient amount of time in creating an organization design that will deliver the required capabilities. What is sufficient depends on a variety of factors--size, complexity, interdependencies, scope, and market conditions, to name a few. In most cases, we're talking weeks and months, not days. The reason it takes this long to design a matrixed organization is that we're designing a highly interdependent and integrated system, and that's a difficult and complex task. Overly simplified or throwaway solutions don't work. If you're not willing to understand the implications of the matrix, you're going to end up with problems down the road. It must have a kind of "pay me now, pay me later" feel to it. But often folks just don't want to be bothered with that and go back to "Let's just call it a matrix and hope everybody figures it out sooner or later."

The Matrix - From Myth to Marvel
The myth is "If we have a matrix, it will work." Nothing could be further from the truth. It doesn't happen by magic. You have to be prepared to deal with the competition and the conflict. You really need to understand what you're getting into and be prepared to do the things that will enable this way of organizing--this integrative structure--to work successfully. The good news is when an organization does its homework and puts the matrix in place with forethought and supervision, it does work, and it is indeed a marvel.

---

RESOURCES:

Matrix by Stanley M. Davis & Paul R. Lawrence (Addison-Wesley Pub Co.- 1978)

This classic backlist book explains the pros and cons of matrix organizations with lots of case studies.

Click here to buy this book

Matrix Management: Not a Structure, a Frame of Mind
by Christopher A. Bartlett Sumantra Ghoshal
Harvard Business Review, July 1990

"In many companies, strategic thinking has outdistanced organizational capability., (and) coordinating its activities across divisions, even continents, means eliminating parochialism, improving communication, and weaving the decision-making process into the company's social fabric."

Click here to buy this reprint

---

You may quote anything herein, with this attribution: "Reprinted from View From The Lighthouse, ©2002 CoastWise Consulting, Inc." provided you also include the website and e-mail links.  Kindly notify us where material will appear @ info@coastwiseconsulting.com. To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change your address, send e-mail to: newsletter@coastwiseconsulting.com with the appropriate instruction on the subject line.