In today's business world, which is characterized by increasingly cross-cutting projects and teams with multiple objectives, the matrix organization chart, also known as matrix organizational structure, is a flexible and appropriate solution.
When a new director is faced with a disorganized and aimless team, where stress and lack of structure predominate, it is normal for them to feel faced with a new challenge. Where responsibilities are not well defined, team members do not have clear direction, conflicts multiply and no results are seen, the new director has to become a empowering leader that establishes order, visibility and purpose. In these cases, the transition to a matrix organizational structure it can be the action that allows us to regain control, redefine roles and achieve a structured collective effort.
The matrix structure combines two lines of authority: the functional one, which is based on areas of specialization, and the project one, oriented to concrete results, allowing functional specialization and strategic orientation to be aligned. This is a differentiating aspect when compared to traditional hierarchical models in which there is only one superior to respond to.
This type of organization allows harnessing talent more efficiently and encouraging collaboration between departments. In the same way, it raises some challenges which we will see later in this article.
This structural model has numerous advantages for companies that operate in dynamic environments. One of them is the efficient use of resources because collaborators can participate in different projects without having to restructure themselves frequently.
Another key aspect is that it promotes communication and cross-cutting collaboration, that is, between departments, which encourages all workers to go in the same direction with their goals. Finally, by exposing professionals to different lines of business, functions and projects, facilitates professional development.
Despite being a solution in many cases, if the implementation is not correct it can pose a problem. One of the main mistakes is the poor definition of responsibilities and ambiguity in roles, Not knowing exactly who to report to or what priority tasks have can be confusing and inefficient. On the other hand, the need to coordinate different lines of authority when making decisions can make this process one slow and tedious. Finally, among the most common errors are resistance to change due to lack of clarity, that is, when employees disagree because of the little information that has been provided to them about the organizational change process.
For a matrix organization to work, it is necessary to profound change in the way we think, communicate and lead. For this reason, it is necessary for companies to invest in continuous training. In this context, the figure of the empowering leader, which acquires a central role and whose function is to guide the team towards a model in which responsibilities are distributed, but without losing coherence or direction.
From the vision of Educa.Pro, the key to success is not in redesigning the structure, but in train leaders and teams in three essential areas:
Implementing training programs adapted to each level of responsibility favors the understanding of the roles of all the members that are part of the matrix. This way, it is possible to optimize performance and strengthen the sense of belonging to the organization.
Below, we are going to see some examples of companies that have implemented this type of organization chart and how it has influenced them.
The company Starbucks has applied a matrix structure combining geographical divisions, products and functionalities, thus allowing it to adapt to the international environment while maintaining brand consistency. It has meant an improvement in the management of different product lines, improving international expansion after their implementation.
P&G adopted a matrix organization model in order to combine global marketing teams and research and development (R&D) divisions, thus increasing advances in innovation and new launches. This change involved the elimination of 6 management layers and, with it, significant annual savings.
IBM moved from a traditional hierarchy to a matrix organization in order to improve its agility and adapt to new markets. The study that was carried out after this implementation highlights greater staff involvement and a better alignment between values, structure and operation.
The adoption of this organizational structure can be the Key to regaining controll when a department is mired in chaos, provided that it is implemented with an awareness of the situation and what it will entail.
Changing the organization chart is the first step, although the True success depends on the team and training that has, in addition to clarity and cross-cutting leadership.
To reorganize is not to have two bosses, it is build a secure and shared network that drives the organization towards a common goal.
.jpg)