organizational structures

I receive many questions from the pmStudent community, and one of the highlights of my day is reading and responding to these.

This morning I received a fantastic question, and I would like to share it with everyone.

[Note: As a general rule, I will exclude first names and countries from now on.  Your privacy is very important to me.  If you want me to refer to you by name and country in a blog post, please let me know.  Otherwise I am going to keep things anonymous so everyone is comfortable!]

Hello Josh,

I would like to thank you for your hard work. All the information you send to us is extremely helpful and educational. That being said, I have a question that confuse me. My question is regarding the relationship between project manager and line manager. Especially when it comes to project driven organization, what is the purpose of line manager. I read a book regarding this, the more I read about it the more I see the conflict and confusion between project manger and line manger. Do you have a chance to explain how line and project managers work together effectively.

Thanks.

Functional and Project Manager's Duel - by uwdigitalcollections via Flickr

Functional and Project Manager's Duel - by uwdigitalcollections via Flickr

In a matrix organization, you are going to have at least two types of managers.  Line or Functional Managers, and Project Managers.  (I will use functional manager and line manager interchangeably).  There are different types of organizational structures along a spectrum which companies can be highly projectized or highly functional.  Along this continuum the project manager role and line manager roles change.  Their roles are also highly dependent on the organizational culture.

It is important for both line and project managers to understand their roles and how they relate to each other, regardless of the organizational structure.  In a perfect world, they work together to manage projects, people, customers, etc. to the benefit of all.  They are collaborators.

If any given organization does not adequately define roles and ensure harmony, it WILL result in territorial struggles and other foolishness.  For instance, both managers may feel it’s their role to give a performance evaluation and fight with each other.  Approval for various things like replacement equipment, forms, etc. may become contentious.

People will fight over stupid things, even (perhaps especially?) managers.

If the interface between project managers and functional managers are not clearly defined, they WILL spend time nit-picking each other and stepping on each other’s toes.

Shape Your PM Career
Get started and get ahead in your project management career.

Functional or Weak Matrix

  • Project Manager: Very little role or authority
  • Line Manager: Full management role and authority

In this organization type, project management is usually not seen as a formal discipline.  Functional managers run their own “projects” which are usually not much more than telling their own direct reports to go do something.

Very similiarly, in a weak matrix you have functional managers who “authorize” projects, but the management of the projects may be done by staff leads and you may also have pseudo project teams that span across multiple functional teams or departments.

Balanced Matrix

  • Project Manager: Part-time and little formal authority, provides some input to performance reviews
  • Line Manager: Full management role, does performance reviews with input from project managers, resources usually spend most of their time on operational work and a little time or temporary full-time on projects as they occur.

This organizational structure introduces the role of project manager.  MANY companies are close to this point on the spectrum.  A project manager is responsible for project(s) but does not have any formal authority over the staff that work on these projects.  In order to gain resources, the project manager will need to negotiate with functional managers for resources, and hopefully she has a good sponsor (who is usually a director or middle manager) who can negotiate for resources and participation before the project begins.

Strong Matrix

  • Project Manager: Full-time and at least as much formal authority as line manager if not more.  Staff report to project managers for years at a time for technical direction and project managers usually provide the bulk of the input and many times deliver performance reporting.
  • Line Manager: Role is mostly to support project staff.  You may see line managers being split out by job skills…engineering team, software development team, support team, etc.  Focused more on developing their specific skill sets and caliber of employees.  May arrange for group training sessions related to their discipline’s focus.  May still do administrative management functions like time cards, vacation time, sick time, etc.  Staffing coordination and planning, taking input from projects and ensuring staff are covered (have full allocations across one or multiple projects) adequately in the future.  Partner with project managers on recruiting and new hires, etc.

With a strong matrix you see the formation of something like a PMO.  Many project managers report to one functional manager.  That person is the functional manager for all the project managers.  Here you can start seeing some effective sharing and implementation of best practices.  Although that is possible in the other matrix models too, it becomes much easier when you have an organizational structure that supports project management as a discipline.

Projectized

  • Project Manager: Employees report directly, full authority.
  • Line Manager: Role may be transferred to the project manager.  If they still exist, they are focused mostly on staffing coordination and planning, taking input from projects and ensuring staff are covered adequately in the future.  They may also coordinate recruiting and new hires, but project managers have the most influence on hiring decisions.

In this environment, project managers are responsible for their projects AND their own staff.  Staff who work on their projects also report to them in a functional/line sense.  These are truly project management organizations.  They make their money by doing projects.

This structure is advantageous if there are long project life cycles or other form of consistency where resources can be working for the same project manager over an extended period of time.  The project manager knows what the staff are doing and can coach and mentor them effectively.

This obviously puts more pressure on the project manager to be effective in managing projects AND all the aspects of people management.  I’d argue that every project manager should strive to be effective in both regardless of the organizational structure, but in a projectized environment it becomes even more critical.

If you want coaching from me for new project managers, I invite you to check out the online training course I put together for you.

I call it “Project Management Strategies That Work (And How To Implement Them)

{ 29 comments }

Let Them Fail

by Josh

I listened to one of my favorite podcasts yesterday, EconTalk.  The episode was a discussion about credit

Image via WikiPedia

Image via WikiPedia

default swaps and more generally about the financial woes we have gotten ourselves into.  Then this morning, I read this article in the New York Times, “U.S. Shifts Focus in Credit Bailout to the Consumer“.

[Editor:  Digressing so early in the post?] My first impression was that we gave the Treasury Department a check for $700 Billion without any real plan for what they would do with it.  You could argue that they are being adaptive and changing their scope and method of execution in response to new information.  Personally, I think they just had a bad plan to begin with, and now that has fallen through they are shooting from the hip.

What I would really like to discuss is the necessity of failure (don’t worry, I’ll tie this into project management at some point)!  In the EconTalk program, Arnold Kling brought up an excellent point.  During the internet bubble, did we go bail out all of the internet start-ups that went belly up?  No.

Companies who operate in such a way that leads to failure should be allowed to fail.  Otherwise, you create an implicit risk-reducing factor in the markets which leads to even more problems in the future.  You also prop up organizational structures and models of behavior that are not self-sustaining otherwise.  What does not fail on its own merit is what is working.  What works should persist until it ceases to work.    Others see what is working and adapt it for themselves.  (for instance, I just adapted the [Editor:] style in this blog from Andy Meyer!  This is evolution, and this is why systems improve when they are not artificially “helped”.

In projects this happens all the time.  Companies keep pouring in good money after bad into projects that should have never been funded in the first place, or should have been evaluated to discover they are no longer viable.  This is a key reason why organizations need portfolio management which is somewhat detached from the functional and project departments.  Sponsors, stakeholders, and the project manager are unlikely to press for the termination of their project.  Their incentives are likely to be aligned with the project’s continuation.  If it costs more, they get a bigger budget to work with.  When they are given more money not tied to scope increases, there is an implicit precedent put in place that failure to plan well is OK.  It’s not OK, regardless of whether you do waterfall, spiral, lean, agile, whatever.  With known high-level scope a project manager should be able to give a decent estimate with a +/- range, even though the detailed requirements and features are defined later.

Another point Arnold brought up was the fact that many analysts and “geeks” in these organizations knew the risks and what was going on, but their voices in the organizations are not heard or disregarded by top management.  This is another excellent lesson for project managers.  Your staff and stakeholders collectively know much more about how things are going and the risks involved than you, your sponsor, or any one person.  Find ways to make communication easy and transparent and leverage collective knowledge.  Recommended reading:  Two Great Wastes at ReformingProjectManagement.

I’d love to hear what you think about all this.  Leave a comment below!

{ 10 comments }