How Would You Justify The Use of A Matrix Design Since It Potentially Violates The Principle of Unity of Command
How Would You Justify The Use of A Matrix Design Since It Potentially Violates The Principle of Unity of Command
How would you justify the use of a matrix design since it potentially violates the principle of
unity of command?
A well-known characteristic of this bureaucratic paradigm is that they all answer to a single
supervisor in the organization. The matrix structure is strikingly different:
Employees are normally responsible to more than one supervisor
There are typically two different command chains
The matrix system is structured to be partly impermanent
There are two categories of bosses: technical bosses and project managers
Management positions are dynamic, not set.
Matrix structures evolved in response to the rise of large-scale projects in contemporary
organizations. The matrix organizational structure offered solutions to these large-scale project issues by
having impermanent project systems coexisting with functional systems that were fairly permanent. For a
particular project a team in the functional system, which was always a sort of organizational organization,
may be recruited from many divisions. Instead of disassembling the functional structure to construct this
temporary project structure, the matrix structure maintains the functional structure and a temporary
project structure is superimposed on it. Team leaders keep reporting to specific administrators, but
reporting to team administrators too. Any member of the team now essentially has two bosses.
Organizational structure refers to assigning management responsibilities and how you organize your
different functions. Many small businesses start with a flat organizational structure which has several
key employees reporting directly to the owner and working with him. As businesses grow, they often
create hierarchical corporate structures, including departments, managers, and subordinates.
1. Poor communication
A poor organizational structure can lead to miscommunication, as people may not be certain who needs
information or where to send important messages. This can lead to delayed orders and long waiting for
customers to pay. This can also lead to customers not getting product, forcing them to find a different
supplier.
2. Lack of Strategic Management
To maximize your growth potential, you'll need to make future plans that create opportunities, rather than
just waiting for new businesses. Without an organizational structure that regularly puts key executives or
employees together, effective long-term strategies will be difficult to build. Strategic management
involves the introduction of new products, the use of new distribution channels, geographical expansion
or the pursuit of new target market. Often these strategies require input from your managers in marketing,
accounting, information technology, production, and sales.
3. Reduced Productivity
If your organization is not set up to create effective communications, or you don't have creative strategic
management, you can miss opportunities, allow problems to continue, and reduce employee morale. If
employees are not happy, they may not volunteer new ideas or may be leaving for a better job. Poor
organizational structure leads to reduced productivity, lowering your potential for growth
4. Damaged Company
Furthermore, with poor organizational structure, you can create problems for your customers when they
do not get timely answers to their questions, receive poor customer service or have to wait for product
delivery longer than normal. You may lose customers when this happens, lose references and the ability
to attract new customers and reduce revenues enough to damage your business.