So there may be more than just the 3 main organization types that Dr. Simon presented in the lecture: http://blog.hubspot.com/marketing/team-structure-diagrams. Say you were to start up a medical device company that will function worldwide. What type of organization would you choose to instate in your company and why?
If I was to start a company I would like to use the Project-based organizational structure. I would like to use this organizational structure because I would rather have a team of project managers who are well versed in the different types of projects that we are trying to execute over a staff of people who are also well versed in those areas. We would be able to split up different projects between different project teams, the teams would run well after the teams adjust because they are focusing on one project at a time, and knowledge would be transferred well from project to project. Duplicate resources may exist, but thats better than no resource and we would implement weekly or bi-weekly meetings where each project would share knowledge to combat the limited knowledge being shared across projects disadvantage.
So there may be more than just the 3 main organization types that Dr. Simon presented in the lecture: http://blog.hubspot.com/marketing/team-structure-diagrams. Say you were to start up a medical device company that will function worldwide. What type of organization would you choose to instate in your company and why?
I think from a business perspective, the matrix-based organization makes the most sense for most industries, including medical devices. To start, one big plus is that departments can have staff working on multiple projects at once which means that there could be more than just one project-per-department member filling the pipeline. This is great as it is using employees to their full potential.
Another reason is that resources won't become redundant. For example, I work in a testing department which supports all business functions from NPD to Marketing. We use very expensive mechanical testing machines and there are less machines than department staff and projects. As a result, we share these resources. If there was a different organizational structure these resources would not be so easily shared and projects would incur higher costs to purchase or maintain their own machines, even if they aren't getting used.
From a global perspective, depending on the size of the company, the matrix-based organization can result in the most effective resources being shared. I am currently working on a project at a matrix-based organization that involves team members from Israel, Puerto Rico, and Brazil. This is a company-wide project and people were recruited based on their effectiveness in executing the required work. Due to the structure, the work can be split up accordingly and the project can be executed faster because there is a larger, more specific network to choose from.
Lastly, the most advantageous part of a matrix-based organization is the departmental sharing of knowledge. I think this is incredibly effective when there is a good moral within the department and the staff is friendly. This encourages conversations and for employees to explain the issues and solutions that they are encountering in their work. This spreads the knowledge and ideas that are developed and continues to grow the overall strength of the company.
I think these are the reasons I would choose a Matrix-based organization to start and international medical device company.
Does anyone have any additional reasons why they would or any reasons why they wouldn't choose a matrix-based organization?
Thanks,
Matt
I would suggest establishing the startup company as a functional organization from the outset. As stated in the lecture, this type of structure is appropriate for small businesses, and the benefits are obvious: Because individuals with similar abilities and knowledge are grouped together by the activities they do, functional departments may allow for higher operational efficiency. As a result, each group of specialists can work autonomously, with management serving as a core for cross-functional communication. This architecture allows for greater specialization. Even if there are disagreements about group communication and decision-making, a startup company normally does not require several groups or board decision-makers. Instead, substantial consideration should be given to how to make things happen and how to complete undertakings efficiently.
I do have different opinions than @naglaa. For startup medical device companies I would highly recommend matrix organization over functional and project-based organizations. In functional organizations, there are silos between departments and I believe that harms the performance. Similarly, in project-based companies, redundant resources are available which is not ideal and costly. Therefore, I would prefer a matrix organization where not only the resources are utilized the most but also a friendly work environment is present. Moreover, functional managers(functional organizations) and project managers(project-based organizations) do have a lot of power that can be risky if the person is not qualified enough. On the other hand, project managers and functional managers can discuss and choose a suitable team for a specific project which have higher success possibilities. These are some of the reasons, for which a matrix organization would be better for medical device startup organizations.
I think my company would be best suited as a functional organization. I like the idea that projects are done within a department and how advancements and positions are clear-cut. Also having one shot caller can be, yes, a bit of an overload in terms of responsibilities, but at the same time having more than one boss isn't as powerful. Best of all though, is that each department will be an expert on their designated projects since projects are done from within. This allows for a sort of regime and organization with what Dr. Simon described as Silos.
At my company I would follow the functional organization chart. It's a form of arrangement that enables seamless cooperation across the flat. I also appreciate the fact that you do not have to answer to several persons. There will be a more functional flow as a result of this. It also provides for a clear hierarchy of power, with everyone understanding their duties and how they fit into it.
As we have become a global society and business is no longer local but international with the touch of a button transactions can take place the matrix-based organization seems to be the best fit model. With the pandemic exposing and exploring new approaches to doing business via zoom and other virtual meeting spaces the traditional functional-based organization style seems like the stone ages. If you want to function worldwide your company needs to be inclusive and diverse and the matrix-based allows for more creativity and innovation. The advantages of a matrix-based organization are as follows: good management of resources, no department or project silos, knowledge transfers well from project to project and between departments and being in multiple locations. The matrix organization seems to be set up to utilize the project management and the design controls in real-time as a living document. I think that in this environment it is a more hands-on approach and active engagement with the process and the paperwork.
Based on the organizations discussed by Simon. I would choose to have a functional organization. It would allow me to have departments with people familiar with each project that is needed. This would allow for a cohesive workflow with one person in charge to enforce and dictate what happens. It allows for advancements and the positions are clear cut. This is the best option for optimal workflow.
As a start-up company, I think that starting as a project organization type of setting would be best. This way the project manager would be comfortable observing the development of his team. As for the staff members, they can learn each other's strengths and weaknesses and build camaraderie between each other. They can also observe how other members perform their work and evaluate if they would like to take on other prospects by conserving with the members. They can either choose to continue or move along to other branches within the company.
Hi from last week's lecture about organizational development, we learned about three types of medical device organization. I would say, for the initial few years of the organization, when the company size is comparatively smaller, I will prefer a project-based organization. It will help to improve the bond and work quality between the specific project group. And initially, I will prefer my organization has few efficient leaders as project managers. And the project-based organization will ensure their role and decisions in product development. However, after the initial phase of the company, I will prefer to move the company into a matrix organization. It will provide the employee opportunity to follow two bosses, a functional manger and a project manager. Additionally, a discussion between two qualified personnel would be better than the decision of one single person for the company's growth.
If I were to start a company, I'd probably choose a matrix organization type to begin with. Since it would be a small startup company at first, the matrix organization type allows information to transfer effectively. Good management of resources is also a must. Usually, startups have multiple projects occurring at once. Matrix organization would allow one person to be in charge of multiple projects, which I think would be the best choice at that moment for the size of the company. Once the company grows I think I would prefer project-based organization.
Q: Say you were to start up a medical device company that will function worldwide. What type of organization would you choose to instate in your company and why?
A: If I were to start up a medical device company that will function worldwide, I would want to have a matrix organization. I would like to have a matrix organization for the free flowing of knowledge from project to project and in between the departments. This would allow for the transfer of ideas that could flow worldwide, but also the transfer of ideas and information that can benefit the masses overall. Everyone having multiple bosses could be a disadvantage, however I would maximize on this concept and allow for the "bosses" to have a lead. They would coordinate the schedules of each department so that the times would not overlap and that each "boss" would have someone who would apply a "checks and balances" system.
If I had a start-up company, I would use a functional organization structure. A functional organizational structure begins at the top with the roles with the highest degrees of responsibility and descends from there, much like a hierarchical organizational structure does. Nevertheless, staff members are mostly structured with respect to their unique skills and the relevant role inside the organization. Each distinct department is run separately.
I think a company's structure can change as the company develops and grows. Once my company reaches a certain milestone, I would restructure to a matrix organizational structure. This structure encourages cross-collaboration in an effort to place the appropriate individuals in the appropriate teams. The leadership approach is also distinct and stems from both functional and project management perspectives.
Would you change the structure of your company as it grows? If so, what would you change it to?
If I was starting a medical device company I would implement a functional organization. The functional organization type is straightforward, structured, and does not seem like it will cause as much complications within the company compared two the other types of organizations.
If I were to start a medical device company, I would opt to operate under a matrix organization structure, preferably a strong matrix structure. In the strong matrix structure, the project managers would have more influence and would be able to effectively choose their team members for their projects. Additionally, there would be little to no chance of silos forming as each project could consist of different members. I also like the project-based organization structure, because the teams work efficiently on different projects, but the staff redundancy may be expensive as a start up.
