Download
1 / 12
120 likes | 230 Vues
This lesson overview explores the significance of organizational structures and culture in project management. It highlights different organizational models, including traditional hierarchies, dedicated project teams, and matrix organizations, detailing their pros and cons. Emphasis is placed on the need for effective communication, authority, and accountability, as well as the role of organizational culture in supporting project success. Key elements such as member identity, team emphasis, and management focus are analyzed to understand their impact on project execution and team performance.
E N D
Project Management for ITM Dennis J. Hood IT 471-K01 Project Management for ITMFall ’04 Center for Professional Development
Lesson Overview • Organizational Structure and Culture • Reading: Ch. 3 • Objectives • Analyze organizational structures alternatives • Discuss pros and cons relative to PM • Examine the role of organizational culture
The Need for Structure • Administration • HR, budget, career development, etc. • Communication • Command and control • Authority and Responsibility • Accountability is essential • Functional Cohesion • Skill and competency development • Economies of scale
Project Organization Differences • Projects are temporary • Project team is only needed for a relatively short period of time • Burst of productivity is critical • Projects are cross-functional • Membership is based primarily on value to the project (not historical ties, etc.) • Understanding of roles is critical • Projects have a small set of well-defined objectives
Option 1 – Traditional Hierarchy • Surface Project from Functional Org • Organize by function, Manage by project • Pros: • Structural integrity • Maximum flexibility • Supports career paths • Cons: • Focus is not on projects • Communication is strained
Option 2 – Dedicated Project Teams • Organize the staff as project teams • PMs have dedicated staff (senior managers) • Some functional presence for operations • Pros: • PM has direct authority • Team is diverse, focused and unified • Cons: • Difficult to optimize utilization (bench?) • Consistent skill development is impeded
Option 3 – Matrix Organization • Hybrid of 1 and 2 • PMs “horizontal” authority overlays “vertical” functional hierarchy • Pros: • More efficient than project organization • More project-focused than traditional • Encourages PM competency development • Cons: • Everyone has two bosses
Option 3 – Matrix Org. (cont.) • Variations of Matrix Organizations • Functional • PM role is largely administrative • Functional manager (FM) role calls the shots • Balanced: • PM responsible for the what • FM responsible for the how • Project: • PM largely calls the shots • FM consulted as needed
Virtual Organizations • Born out of downsizing / rightsizing • “Specialists” ally to execute projects • Typically a core organization owns the project and contracts out for functions outside of its core competencies • Pros: • Cost effectiveness, expertise and flexibility • Cons: • Ownership, command and control
Culture • Every organization has its own culture • Culture is largely set at the top and difficult to change • Culture must support structure and vice versa • If not, projects will fail
Culture Characteristics • Member Identity • Team Emphasis • Management Focus • Unit Integration • Control • Risk Tolerance • Reward Criteria • Conflict Tolerance • Means vs. End Orientation • Open-Systems Focus
Culture Management • Identify Current Culture • Physical Environment • Documented Evidence • Observed Behavior • Folklore • Modification • Clearly define desired modifications • Change at the top and push down • Turnover staff as necessary
