The project management approach highly depends on what type of organization it is, and so identifying the suitable type of organization is crucial for project success. The authority given to the project manager varies across organization types. In project-based organizations project managers are provided with high authority and therefore issues such as power play and conflict between functional managers which are common issues with functional organizations are minimized. Further in project-based organizations, there is a clear point of contact for clients; the project manager. Functional organizations often struggle with interdepartmental communication and this sometimes leads to delays in communicating the project status to clients. 

In my opinion, projects that require long-term skill development or technical expertise in certain domains would be best suited for a functional organization structure. The efficiency of each functional group is enhanced over time in a functional organization. Projects that require repetitive tasks that can be broken down into pieces are best suited for functional organization structure. A long-running IT project could be a suitable example.  

I believe a matrix organization would be the most efficient in regards to project outcome and team coordination due to the management of resources limiting the duplication of those resources and knowledge transfer between projects as well as departments. Although everyone having two bosses would be a major disadvantage, I believe the advantages outweigh this and would make the most efficient organization. 

The management of resources in this organization would be efficient by only using staff from each department when it is necessary, and take away the problem of having staff only on one project when they are not needed the entire time (which is a problem in the project-based organization). The efficient knowledge transfer between projects and departments would improve the overall communication in a company. Sharing information between both projects and departments would decreases the risk of information being lost if it is only shared between projects or departments as seen in the other organizations. In addition, the matrix organization has the added benefit of staff working with various people from other projects as well as other departments. By working with a larger variety of people, the overall network and communication in a company will be improved by limiting the development of cliques created when staff continuously work with the same people. 

If all of these organizational types ran perfectly, I think that a matrix organization would be the most efficient and effective in terms of project management, regardless of the project. The transfer of information and personnel in a matrix organization makes it the optimal organization for projects since this flexibility means that the best personal and resources can be chosen for each project on a case-by-case basis. Information and resources flow easily between groups, and the chances of, "clicks" forming amongst groups are greatly reduced. 

That being said, a poorly organized matrix organization will not be able to compete with a well organized functional organization, even if in theory the matrix organization is better. Success depends on effort and on how well these organizational types are organized (as well as on the people who make up these organizations). 

I think that any project could succeed in a well-run organization, what determines success is not the project itself but the people who make up the organization and how well they work within its design. 

I believe there are several factors that go into deciding what organization type will work best for a company. For example, a functional organization might work well for a big company with multiple projects and plenty of resources. These companies could afford to dedicate entire departments to one project. Smaller companies and start-ups might not have the resources to do so. From personal experiences, these smaller companies might have to use a matrix organization where individuals report to different supervisors and are part of multiple projects. In this way, individuals become knowledgeable in different tasks and can function in several departments. However, regardless of the organization type, I think companies can find success in any one of these organization types. I think good communication can help many of the issues that arise from within these organization types. Whether it be difficulty in coordinating projects between departments, poor transfer of knowledge between projects/teams, or scheduling/resource conflicts, maintaining good and consistent communication between project team members, managers, and supervisors can help lessen the the negative impact of these issues on project completion. 

The impact of an organization type on efficiency of a project is highly dictated by organization culture and size.  We are all familiar with the phrase: “we’ll it’s always been that way,” and generally this is the case because of an organization’s culture.  Equally, the cultural status quo has a direct impact on project outcomes.  As a business consultant, I see this time and time again, especially with family owned or small privately owned companies. 

Such enterprises, whether 50 employees or 500, defer all major decisions to one person or a very small group. This is the functional approach.  It works well for any project within the company because all employees have “bought in” to the culture of decisions being made by the “top three” employees.  Conversely, when a company becomes enterprise-sized, it will likely employee a matrix organization, unless it grew fast.  In such case it will likely reorg itself so that projects can be better segmented among departments and employees have accountability to different leaders. 

Employees of an enterprise-sized company in the matrix organization will be highly effective because their work product will be visible by multiple leaders.  Therefore, all projects will have the opportunity for collaboration.  Generally, projects only stall when different departments are reliant upon data sharing and there is no conduit to facilitate the data exchange (i.e., the goal of resources like Microsoft Teams).  Matrix organizations work well for large companies that are 1,000 employees or more. Still, there are cultural nuances that employees must learn (i.e., the company leaders may consider I use too many and prefer I communicate in bullets).

Project-based organizations are applicable for any size company and company culture because they are used for special projects that by nature mean a limited number of people are working together.  As long as the group finds harmony, the project style will deliver.

I believe a matrix organization would be the most efficient in regards to outcomes and project team communication. Although this project can have conflicting projects and department schedules, it will allow for the most communication between departments, allowing more projects to be completed. It may need work to meet deadlines, but with more communication and someone to create schedules between the most efficient departments, the project can be completed promptly. With the other organization, there would too much overlap and not enough communication to be successful. 

When discussing Organizational Behavior I think the management model's always set us in the right direction. I also believe the best organizational model is a supportive model; this is a framework for thinking about organizational behavior. It is built on leadership, motivating, and inspiring workers. Within organizations, I believe that it is always necessary to support your workers. So a manager’s job is to help foster that motivation by reinforcing the employee’s talents, interests, and goals. This is built on the understanding that employees will take the initiative and increase their performance with the proper support.

I believe matrix organizations are the most efficient in regard to project outcomes and team communication. Based on the descriptions given, it is the only organization that manages resources well, has great communication across departments, and transferrable knowledge. The other two have one or two of these qualities, however the matrix organization encompasses a complete view of positive outcomes and effective communication.

Posted by: @delany

↑

I believe matrix organizations are the most efficient in regard to project outcomes and team communication. Based on the descriptions given, it is the only organization that manages resources well, has great communication across departments, and transferrable knowledge. The other two have one or two of these qualities, however the matrix organization encompasses a complete view of positive outcomes and effective communication.

I fully agree with Delaney on this point. Matrix organizations are the most modern & efficient organizations in my mind. I may be biased as I have only worked at jobs with a matrix-style organizations, but the effectiveness of the PM style is evident. I do want to bring attention to one interesting aspect of the matrix style organization that I've had personal experience with. As Dr. Simon mentioned in his lectures this week; due to the matrix style organization, an employee can have more than one boss. At my old workplace we had many simultaneous projects running; each with their own development method. I was able to work on two kinds of engineering document; as a result our CEO & Structural engineer both needed to negotiate my time. It was interesting, to say the least, being whisked from one project to another. Sometimes more than once a day!

In evaluating the three types of organizational structures, it is clear that all three are efficient depending on the organization. For a company that takes on a lot of different short-term projects, it may be beneficial to use a project-based organization, while a company that prefers more stability and has fewer products might prefer a functional organization. Additionally, a company that may have more products might be best suited for a matrix organization. It is difficult to decide which organizational structure would be the most efficient but from the perspective of employees, functional organizations and matrix organizations may be more desirable due to their stability. A project-based organization provides less job security since it is based on the availability of projects as well as the nature of the projects. Matrix organizations also allow for more communication between different departments. For the case of medical device companies, it may be beneficial to adopt a matrix organization since projects will require different personnel from different departments such as quality, regulatory, manufacturing, and research and development. 

I think both project-based and matrix organizations are very efficient styles of project team organization. However, if I were to choose between the two, I think that project-based organizations are more successful in designing and developing successful products. Within project-based organizations, everyone in the project team focuses on the same project under a single project manager, which ultimately increases the quality and success resulting products. Both matrix and functional organizations are also efficient in their own ways, but I think that the companies that organize their project teams following project-based organizations have employees that are more focused on their single project resulting in better outcomes in the long-run. For example, if you take an employee that is involved in Project A and another involved in Projects A and B, the employee involved in Project A only likely spends much more time and effort working on that project. On the other hand, the second employee needs to split his/her time and effort between Projects A and B. Although I believe that the project-based organizational structure is more efficient, that may not be the case every time. Before initiating a project, a company needs to decide which organizational structure works best for them.

From personal experience, functional-based organizations are best in smaller organizations because it's quite easy for members to share information. Often the infrastructure between silos are easily accessible. On the contrary, larger organizations often have infrastructure that isolate functional teams. For instance, the research facility I work at has different teams doing their own projects, but because we don't have the resources to separate our work from each other, each functional team constantly interacts with each other in a healthy way. This allows us to exchange resources and information quickly.

Personally, all organizations should have a project-based team but should not have its structure based off of a project-based team. Project based teams should be viewed as specialists that can get the job done or an inevitable organizational choice due to significant infrastructure problems. An infrastructure issue is coordinating a team in two time zones. It's common to have two teams with duplicate resources rather than attempt coordination several hours apart, especially when there could be cultural and language differences. Specialist teams should be in charge of critical and challenging projects that the organization require the highest rate of success per return.

At larger sizes, organizations absolutely need to rely on a matrix-organization. The larger the company, the more resource inefficient it tends to become. Matrix-organizations is the best type of organizational structure for resource allocation. A larger company can view the increased cost of management in a matrix-based organizational as a better return on equity if it minimizes inefficiencies more than the total cost of inefficiency.

In my ideal outcome, functional-based organizations should be done at a small scale, then transition to a matrix-based organization as the company gets larger. At all levels, project based teams should be considered or incorporated based on the company's needs.