The Matrix
List of Questions for Audience
Participation
• How many have seen the Matrix?
• How many have seen the Matrix multiple
times?
• How many of you saw a different movie
each time?
• How many wish I would just show the
Matrix?
How many of you wish that John
would have chosen the BLUE pill?
Tank: Download me a Matrix
Management 101 Primer
Blatant Plagiarism
• MIT Sloan School
• Managing Technical
Professionals and
Organizations
– Ralph Katz, Tom Allen
http://mitsloan.mit.edu/execed/specialexec/courses/tech-profs-orgs.htm
Blatant Plagiarism
• More stuff
Why a Matrix?
• When Functional?
• When Project?
• What Balance?
Basic Issues Influencing
Organizational Structure
Knowledge
Management
Systems/
Integration
Resource
Allocation
Reward
Structures
Types of Knowledge
• Market Knowledge
• Technical Knowledge
Type I
Type II
Knowledge of what other team
members are doing
Knowledge about new developments
in the discipline or specialty
Type III New knowledge (creativity)
The Process of Innovation
Technology
Input
Market
Output
Innovation
Functional/Departmental/Input
Organization
Technology
Market
D1
D2
D3
D4
D5
Project/Output Organization
Technology
P1
Market
P2
P3
Department vs. Project
• Departmental
• Project
– Closely mapped to the
supporting technologies
– Better connections to
technological innovation
– Less coordination of
project tasks and less
responsiveness to
market change
– Different disciplines united
for a common purpose
– Strong coordination of the
project tasks and able to
react to market dynamics
– Accomplished at the cost of
separation from the
disciplinary knowledge. At
an extreme, leads to
technology erosion.
Matrix Organization
Technology
P1
Market
P2
P3
D2
D3
D4
D5
Matrix Organization
Technology
P1
Market
P2
P3
D2
D3
D4
D5
Program Manager Discovers the
Matrix
Creative(?) Tension
• Functional managers want to improve
technology
– Shipping product gets in the way
• Project managers want to ship product
– Don’t give a damn about improving technology
What are the drivers that
determine Matrix balance?
•
•
•
•
Rate of Change of Technology
Rate of Change of Market
Interdependence of Functional Groups
Interdependence of Projects
Rate of Change of Technology
• If Technology is changing rapidly, then
there is a need to maximize the flow of
technology knowledge.
Technology
Market
Innovation
Rate of Change of Market
• A dynamic market requires an organization
that is geared to shipping product and
which is tightly connected to the market.
Technology
Market
Innovation
Market and Technology Change
dM/dt and dT/dt
dM/dt
Project
Mission
Impossibl
e
Either
Functional
dT/dt
Mission Impossible Options
• Make do with more mature technology
• Acknowledge that keeping up with
technology is more critical than market
pressures
• High performing matrix organization
• Reduce the project time and cycle people
into and out of the project
Interdependence of Functional
Groups
• When functional activities are highly
interdependent, a structure which supports
cross functional communication is required.
D1
D2
D3
D4
D5
e.g. Development and Domain Science
Interdependence of Projects
• When Projects require highly interdependent
technologies, a structure which links the
technologies through the projects is required.
P1
P2
P3
e.g. OpenWorks Integration
Integration
Functions
Project
Matrix
Either
Functional
Projects
Functional Interdependence
(function)
dM/dt
Project
Functional
dT/dt
Functional Interdependence
(function)
dM/dt
Project
Functiona
l
dT/dt
Project Interdependence
(project)
dM/dt
Project
Functional
dT/dt
Project Interdependence
(project)
Project
dM/dt
Functional
dT/dt
Types of Teams
•
•
•
•
•
Functional Teams
Lightweight Project Teams
Heavyweight Project Teams
Tiger Teams
Hybrid Teams
Functional
Dept
Mgr
Dept
Mgr
Dept
Mgr
Subprojects
Well defined Interfaces
Dept
Mgr
Lightweight Projects
Proj
Mgr
Dept
Mgr
Dept
Mgr
Dept
Mgr
Dept
Mgr
Dept
Liason
Dept
Liason
Dept
Liason
Dept
Liason
MSF/SOLID Team Structure
Heavyweight Projects
Proj
Mgr
Dept
Mgr
Dept
Mgr
Dept
Mgr
Dept
Mgr
Dept
Liason
Dept
Liason
Dept
Liason
Dept
Liason
Tiger Teams
Proj
Mgr
Dept
Mgr
Dept
Mgr
Dept
Mgr
Dept
Mgr
Dept
Liason
Dept
Liason
Dept
Liason
Dept
Liason
Hybrid Projects
Dept
Mgr
Proj
Mgr
Dept
Liason
Dept
Mgr
Dept
Liason
Dept
Mgr
Dept
Mgr
Dept
Liason
Dept
Liason
LGC Pre-Reorg
Development,
Dept
Mgr
Dept
Mgr
Dept
Liason
Dept
Liason
Product Geoscientists
Proj
Mgr
Dept
Liason
Dept
Liason
Testing, User Education, Logistics
Project vs. Functional
Project
Tiger Teams
Heavyweight
Lightweight
Functional
Technology Transfer
• It is a “people process”
– Transferring documentation is, at best, an
auxiliary process.
– People must be in direct contact and
understand each other to transfer knowledge.
– Moving people is the most effective way to
move knowledge
• Organizationally or Geographically
– Organizational boundaries generate different
cultures which impose serious barriers to the
transfer of technology.
Katz and Allen Study of Office
Communication
Probability of Communication
Probability of Communication
0.35
0.3
0.25
All Pairs
0.2
IntraDepartment
0.15
IntraProject
0.1
D
0.05
P
0
0
20
40
60
Distance in Meters
80
100
Communication Findings
• Project influence (P) is typically greater than
Department influence (D)
• Communication Types
Type I Coordinate Work
Type II Maintain Knowledge
Type III Promote Creativity
• Project communication is most often Type I,
Functional communication is Type II or Type III
Summary so far
• Drivers influencing Organizational Balance
– Technology change--dT/dt
– Market change--dM/dt
– Subsystem Interdependence--Function
– Project Interdependence-- Project
• Types of teams
• Communication
How does this relate to
Landmark?
• Classic Unix Products
dT/dt
Low
dM/dt
Med
Function Med
Project
dM/dt
Project
Med
dT/dt
How does this relate to
Landmark?
• New Paradigm
dT/dt
High
dM/dt
High
dM/dt
Mission
Impossible
Function Med
Project
Med
dT/dt
Reno – Mission Impossible?
• Tiger team like
• Short project duration
• But…The overall project is long term
– Multiple iterations (Tahoe, Carson City)
– Constant refactoring and introduction of new
technology will be required
– Growing the teams will present challenges
– Long term success will most likely require a
migration from a Tiger team to a high
performance matrix
What Problems Do We See?
• One size fits all
– Different Technology Maturities
– Different Market Maturities
– Different Integration Needs
• We are in danger of replacing product silos
with functional silos
Functional view of the Matrix
Percy Barnevik,
Former CEO of ABB
“The Matrix is a fact of life.“
“If you deny the formal matrix you end up
with an informal one—and that’s much
harder to reckon with.”
“They (the functional and project mangers)
must understand that they are
complimenting each other, not competing”
Roussel: 3rd Generation R&D
“Experience in R&D organizations across all
industries shows that a project manager is
accepted by the line departments only if he
has a budget with which to “buy” services
from the line departments. Access to
money confers access to control, stature,
and respect.”
Organizational Challenges
• Team Issues
– Create Teams
• More than just putting a group of people together
– The matrix provides flexibility for varying the
Team organization balances, why not use it?
– Office proximity should be guided by project
and functional team needs
– Empower Teams to Make Decisions
– If Teams can’t reach a decision, make sure that
the Escalation path is efficient and well
defined
Conclusions from Allen and Katz
“Analyses show higher project performance
when influence over salaries and
promotions is perceived as balanced
between project and functional managers.
Performance reaches its highest level,
however, when organizational influence is
centered in the project manager and
influence over the technical details of the
work is centered in the functional
manager"
Questions?