7/29/2019 29 Matrix Management
1/6
Matrix ManagementNot a Structure, A Frame of Mind
Aastha Grover | Aditi Gupta | Aniket Kulkarni |Ankur Aggarwal | Chitrank Jain | Tanya Malhotra
Group # 29
7/29/2019 29 Matrix Management
2/6
Choice is between Sticking to the knitting and fighting fire with fire.
Choice has to be made because - dramatic changes in the global business landscape.
Guess what?? Its not an either or case.
The answer was Matrix Management - parallel reporting relationships, multiple
information channels and overlapping responsibilities.
But there are no free lunches. Parallel reporting > Confusion & turf battles,
geographical barriers etc.
Whats the ideal way a) Focus on managing details i.e. peoples & processes.
b) Dont make a plan instead focus on creating a process which comes up with a plan.
c) Capture individuals capabilities and thereby motivate organization.
Why Matrix Management?
7/29/2019 29 Matrix Management
3/6
Earlier: - Focus on strategic innovation rather than organizational challenges
Matrix Management defined objective in purely structured terms. They must also
concern themselves with: -
Organizational Physiology
System that allows information to flow
Shared norms , values and beliefs
Building the organization rather than developing a completely new structure. They: -
Develop clear corporate vision
Manage human resource
Integrated Individual thinking
Building an organization
7/29/2019 29 Matrix Management
4/6
Building a shared Vision
Need for a shared vision:
Change in the anatomy must be complemented by change in psychology
Mangers of large organizations tend to be bound by their specific responsibilities
Clarity of
expression:
Three keys to clarity of expression of vision- simplicity, relevance and reinforcement
Simplicity- Simple enough to be accepted organization wide ( Eg: C&C)
Relevance- Linking broad objectives to concrete agendas (Eg: Phillips)
Reinforcement- continual reinforcement, elaboration and interpretation of the vision (Eg: Panasonic)
Continuity ofpurpose:
Organization must continue to be committed to their core values despite changes in leadership orshort term business priorities
Lack of continuity in core objective strategies leads to confusion (Eg: GE operations in Brazil)
Consistencyof application:
Top management must ensure that everyone in the company shares a common vision
Lack of consistency of application in vision leads to chaos among managers often resulting in mutuallydebilitating agendas (Eg: North American Phillips)
3 Cs of an organizations vision
7/29/2019 29 Matrix Management
5/6
Key to regaining control of Companies that operate in fast changing
environment is possible only if the top management has the ability to
turn the individual managers into the building blocks of the organization.
This can be done if a company invests in developing its human resources
and use it as a trump card in times of crisis. Developing Human Resourceis a continuous process and following things need to be done for it.
1) Recruitment & Selection
2) Training and Development
3) Career Path Management
Developing Human Resources
7/29/2019 29 Matrix Management
6/6
The Case of Philips
CASEConvert managers intellectual understanding of the corporate vision to defend
Western electronics against the Japanese into a binding personal commitment
PROBLEMS
SOLUTION
Created a top-level World Policy
Council for its video business that
included key managers from
strategic markets. The reluctance
of independent managers to take
orders from Dutch units was co-
opted through this council
Allocation of global responsibilities
to units that previously had been
purely national in focus. NAP
Given lead in the development of
projection television &
coordination between Asia and
North America
Improving coordination without
depletion of commitment of
national management teams
NAP refused to share the same
vision as its parent company &
refused to launch new VCRs
The challenge is not so much to build a matrix structure as it is to create amatrix in the minds of our managers
Co-option had transformed the defensive, territorial attitude of NAP managers into
a more collaborative mind-set. They were making important contributions to global
corporate strategy instead of looking for ways to subvert it
RESUTLTS
KeyLearning: