Chapter 11 - Organizing people in the project Flashcards
Gathering teams are usually a very hit or miss thing. What seems to be the main conflict?
Very few teams will achieve outstanding performance in regards to both social interaction AND commercial success. Teams either become too good friends, or too bad.
What is the point of teams?
The point is twofold:
1) Cross-specialized teams are suitable to solve a wider problem.
2) Multiple people can “spar” and increase processing power together.
Both cases do this: Form an entity that perform BETTER than the sum of the individuals would have on their own.
What has been, and perhaps still is, the traditional way of organizing people in organizations?
The silo approach / line approach. Grouping people into units based on fields.
In fact, most groups organize themselves this way.
However, it is detrimental to creativity, innovation and responsiveness. We actually need cross-functional teams to be able to respond to market needs etc.
What is the classical, traditional structure or organizations=
The pyramid structure. However, this is getting more and more outdated.
What structures could serve as alternatives to the traditional pyramid?
We could structure our org around the following:
- Product group
- Customer type
- Geographical area
- The function they perform
Can the PM determine the project structure
In an increasing level, yes. As the PM role becomes ever more important, their ability to influence project structure grows correspondingly. Therefore, as a PM, it is paramount to understand different structures.
Elaborate on the life cycles of teams
5 phases of teams:
1) Collection
2) Entrenchment
3) Resolution
4) Synergy
5) Decline
6) Break up
In summary, we start a team. Then people are generally motivated, happy, afraid of not fitting in. People will usually go to quite lengthy lengths to maintain the positive atmosphere. Sort of weak theory X relationship. Team members dont think other team members tolerate criticism.
The entrenchment phase typically begins with a conflict. The usual suspects include: Difference in goals, differnece in expectations, difference in ethical, legal, general values. The result is conflict.
This phase is typically very destructive. If handled poorly, teams, at least certain part of it, may never recover.
If the team manage to resolve their issues, they will start building trust, confidence and motivation. The team will start actually performing.
Peak effectiveness is reached at some point, where the team will perform at ridiculous levels. High-performance teams.
However, at some point, the effectiveness will begin to fall of. The usual suspects include: Social focus rather than performance focus and things running stale.
Name some very important characteristics that the PM musth ave in regards to effective teamwork (8 total)
1) A clear, elevating goal
2) Provide a results-driven structure
3) Competent team members
4) Unified commitment
5) Foster a collaborative climate
6) Standards of excellence
7) External support and recognition
8) Institute principled leadership
Is much integration good or bad?
Too much integration is bad because it will lead to group thinking.
What different structures of organizations do we consider?
1) The pure project orgnaization
2) Matrix management
3) Functional organization
Elaborate on the pure project organisation
We move away from the silo-based org, and embrace the project-oriented approach.
At the highest level, there are staff. We call this the PROJECT BOARD. The project board typically includes: Senior managers, directors, administrative staff etc.
At the next, lower level, we have a series of project managers who are responsible for their own project. The team itself will vary depending on where in the project process they currently are. Ex, in the planning phase, the team might consist of more engineers, architects, planners etc.
But, as we move into hands-on phases, the team is largely consisting of do’ers. Perhaps contractors. Once the particular task in completed, the team in each case is disbanded. The PM, however, move on to other projects.
The ADVANTAGES of the pure project orgnaisation, are as follows:
1) The labor force is highly flexible. Contractors make sure of this.
2) The main company only has to administor the employment of its own staff - saving costs of directly employing others
The DISADVANTAGES are significant as well:
1) The project team is temporary, and therefore have no commitment to the success.
2) When there is a boom in a specific industry, labor is typically of shortage.
3) It is hard to pass on lessons learned when the teams are new every time.
Elaborate on matrix management
Matrix management was invented as a way of achieving some of the benefits of the project organization without all of its disadvantages.
There are 3 situations where matrix management is appropriate:
1) Where there is more than one orientation to the acitivies of the operation. E.g. multiple custoemrs or geographical differneces in market needs
2) Where there is the need to process simultaneously large amounts of information
3) Where there is a need to share resources
Matrix structure = matrix systems + matrix culture + matrix behavior.
The organisation of the matrix has 3 models:
1) Lightweight matrix
2) Balanced
3) Heavyweight matrix
Elaborate on the heavyweight matrix
Heavyweight matrix management, like all types of matrices, attempt to achieve benefits of the pure project organization without all of its disadvantages.
Heavyweight matrix management make functional departments the role of providing resources to the project. Human resources as well as other resources. Functional departments assist the project.
When the project is finished, everyone return to their lines/departments.
Because of the extreme focus on the project, we typically use this method when the project outcome is of extreme importance to the organisation. This is becasue we are essentially limiting our other work in order to improve project results.
elaborate on the lightweight matrix management.
In this structure, PMs work more as coordinators of the project work, and have very little influence on other line/functional heads/departments.
In lightweight matrix management, the benefits that are to be delivered by the project is typically an initiative by the heads of departments, and represent smaller change. As a result, they have control over budget, and the direction of the project. Therefore, the project manager can only coordinate and use the allocated resources to try to reach goals.
As a scenario, I picture it like this: Suppose some organization, like a university or an other large institution, needs a new service. Perhaps they need a new software solution, a smaller solution, like a communications platform for some of the organization. This is not a major project, and could perhaps be initiated by a specific part of the organization. For instance, the faculty of economics could initiate a project of updating the service where students upload course work. Because of the minor project importance, the department head allocate the resources and determine the direction of the project. The PM must oblige, and coordinate the work so that it meets, and perhaps exceeds, expectations of the department.
Elaborate on the balanced matrix model
This is an attempt to balance the power between line managers and project manager. The scenario would be something like this:
The line manager needs the activities of the project manager to balance their resources. i.e. the project provides a means of securing part of the income of that function.
The drawback is the two-bosses tgings.
