Project Management: Functional, Matrix, and Dedicated Team Approaches

What are the relative advantages/disadvantages to the functional, matrix, and dedicated team approaches?

Functional

Advantages:

(a) Project follows the format/structure of the PARENT company or organization. So, the parent’s design does not have to be seriously changed.
(b) Maximum flexibility of staff: people can be assigned to work on whatever projects needs to be done at any time, regardless of their “native” positions. This provides for a diverse technical pool.
(c) If project scope is narrow and all the functional units have been appropriately assigned, then skills can be used to efficiently complete the project.
(d) People’s careers will remain constant; they will always have a “home base” to return to.

Disadvantages:

(a) Lack of project focus is often an issue because people feel obligated to their functional responsibilities before their project responsibilities. The difference in priorities of one unit can affect other units as well. That is, if engineering feels obligated to their functional responsibilities before their project duties, and other units are waiting on engineering before they can begin, then the project will be delayed.
(b) Functional units are not well integrated. Coordination/communication between the units is slow and inefficient. Dedicated functional staff are only committed to their portion and not the project as a whole.
(c) Due to the reasons stated above, the project will take longer to complete.
(d) Low motivation of staff. Project can be seen as a burden, a distraction from their normal duties. So their dedication to project goals is not as high as the other two approaches. Lack of ownership or identification with the project are other causes for low motivation.

Matrix

Advantages:

(a) Resources utilization and people-skills in the organization is quite flexible: both the functional and project manager play a role in who/what goes where. The degree to who has more control depends on which “grade” of matrix this is: functional, balanced or project.
(b) Project can draw upon the entire bank of technology and skills of the functional divisions. Team members also have a “home” to go to when project is finished.
(c) Focus of project is stronger than a purely functional approach since there is a dedicated project manager.
(d) Resources can be shared amongst the functional units and other projects. People can be tackle multiple projects at the same time. This reduces cost – compared to the dedicated project team approach – as duplicate jobs are eliminated.

Disadvantages:

(a) There can be a lot of tension between the functional managers and the project manager because they have to work so closely together. There may be power struggles or differences in opinion. It’s a tricky situation.
(b) Sharing resources within the organization can be a cause of conflict or competition if the resources are hard to come by.
(c) Project members have TWO bosses. This can be stressful if one tells you to do one thing and the other tells you to do something different. Who do you obey?
(d) Due to the presence of “multiple functional groups”, the project manager can become overwhelmed by the agreements between the groups.

Dedicated

Advantages:

(a) Does not disrupt operations of parent nor does it take away the parent org’s resources (other than special project-only members)
(b) Strong, dedicated focus to the project. I.E., the project comes before anything else. The project manager has much more freedom to control his/her team than in the other two approaches.
(c) Speed: projects are completed much more quickly due to the dedicated effort.
(d) High motivation and adhesion of staff members. They are all on the same boat and they stick together, offering each other lots of support. There is a great deal of responsibility shown.
(e) High level of cross-functional integration. People with different types of skills commit themselves to help optimize the project even though it may not be their area of expertise.

Disadvantages:

(a) A dedicated project team is more expensive to implement. This is due to the variety of new positions that have to be filled as well as new resources required. There can be duplication of effort within the organization. That is, there can be mechanical engineers for the functional departments and dedicated mech. engineers for the project.
(b) Projectitis: the we-they situation that may arise if project members start to feel disconnected (or discontent) with the parent organization This situation can produce the “let-down” situation when the project is completed and the team members have to return to their functional duties.
(c) Sometimes, the full range of technical competence needed for the project cannot be obtained (brought in from the outside, such as from functional departments) due to the “closed” or “contained” nature (culture) of the project. There is again the “we-they” syndrome. Team members want the credit to themselves.
(d) Where do the team members go after the project? In a functional or, perhaps, a matrix approach, they may have a home to return to. This, as stated, can be an anti-climax to a, perhaps, very rewarding experience.

What distinguishes a functional matrix from a project matrix?

The functional matrix approach is much like the dedicated functional approach (see above) except that there is a project manager coordinating the project activities. The functional managers (functional managers) manage their own portion of the project. The project manager is basically a “consultant” or assistant that has indirect authority over the project. In other words, functional managers are the bosses and the project managers are the “second bananas.”

In the project matrix, the situation is basically reversed. This approach tries to emulate the “feel” of the dedicated project approach. The project manager calls most of the shots including which functional personnel will be assigned to the project. The project manager has the final say on the major project decisions. The functional manager’s role is limited; in some situations, the functional manager’s department can even act as a “sub-contractor” to the project. Ex.: The project team may only complete the design/development of a high-tech product. Then, “sub-contract” the functional production and marketing departments to produce and market the product.

Under what conditions would it be advisable to use a project matrix instead of a dedicated project team?

If time-to-market and high-quality priorities come before development costs, then a dedicated team is the way to go. The dedicated team sill will devote their entire focus and effort and dedication onto creating a good, sound product on a very efficient time schedule (all else being equal, of course). The dedicated project team approach should also be considered if the organization’s resources are already stretched to the limit – i.e., committed to other projects/duties. If this is the case, establishing (or outsourcing) a dedicated project team is the way to go. Finally, a dedicated team may desirable if the matrix culture does not work within an organization. That is, with the matrix approach as stated above, the balance of power between the project manager and functional manager can lead to conflicts. In neither the functional nor the dedicated approach does this situation exist. So, if you’ve got an organization were there are tensions between the two sides, then the dedicated approach is more sound.

In basic terms, you have to see how the people of an organization get along in order to find ways for them to work together on a team. The culture of each organization is different just as one person is different from another. Organizational culture reflects the sum of people that work within it. For example, if the organization has a culture that encourages innovation and collaboration among the various staff members, then it is already “project oriented” and, therefore, a functional-only or functional matrix approach may prove to be the best approach towards new projects. If the organization does not encourage these qualities, it is best to break off from the parent and form a dedicated project team.

A good analogy can be given by comparing the culture of an organization as the “river” and the project as the “boat” that travels on it. In the case of my company, internal projects are equivalent to paddling upstream. That is, we do not have a strong project-oriented culture. Part of this has to do with corporate politics. As a manufacturing facility, the emphasis is on functional responsibilities – they come first. That is, the quantity of product “out the door” is priority one. Projects are approved only on the basis that they will improve functional performance. This atmosphere is not conducive to promoting any significant internal projects. Another part of the reason why the company does not have an ideal project environment has to do with the culture that has evolved within the company over the past few years. Downsizing and restructuring within the ConAgra group has induced some morale problems from top management down to the individual plants. Needless to say, most of our internal projects have not gone well because the culture just does not support it. Therefore, for most projects, team members are outsourced (sub-contracted). They work with the plant’s internal project manager to complete various projects.

More Articles