Assignment # 1
in
Project Management
Hagad, Angelica C.
BSBA 4-A
Notes
IDENTIFY THE PROS & CONS OF
VARIOUS ORGANIZATIONAL
STRUCTURES AND CULTURES FOR
PROJECT MANAGEMENT
(DISCUSS AND EXPLAIN)
FUNCTIONAL STRUCTURE
MATRIX
PROJECTIZED
HYBRID
FUNCTIONAL STRUCTURE
The choice of organizational structure and culture can have a significant
impact on project management within an organization
Pros:
1. Specialization and Expertise: Functional structures often result in
teams of specialists who are highly skilled in their respective areas.
This can lead to high-quality project work within their domain of
expertise.
2. Efficiency: Since employees are grouped by their skill sets, there is
often high efficiency in completing routine tasks or projects that fall
within a specific functional area.
3. Clear Hierarchy: There is a clear reporting hierarchy in functional
structures, making it easier to assign responsibilities and track
progress.
4. Cost Control: Functional structures can help control costs by
optimizing the use of specialized resources.
Cons:
1. Limited Cross-Functional Collaboration: Functional silos can hinder
communication and collaboration between different departments or
functions, which can be detrimental to projects that require
interdisciplinary cooperation.
2. Slow Decision-Making: Decisions often need to go through multiple
layers of management, leading to slower decision-making and
potentially delaying project execution.
3. Lack of Project Focus: Functional structures prioritize functional
objectives over project objectives, which can lead to a lack of focus
on project goals and timelines.
4. Resistance to Change: Employees may resist changes in their routine
work or the introduction of new project management methods or
technologies.
PROJECTIZED
Projectized organizational structures and cultures are designed to
prioritize and facilitate project management.
Projectized Organizational Structure
Pros:
1. Project Focus: The primary advantage of a projectized structure is
that it places a strong emphasis on projects. This structure is ideal for
organizations where projects are the core business.
2. Clear Accountability: Project teams have clear accountability for
project success, which can lead to a high level of commitment and
motivation among team members.
3. Fast Decision-Making: Since project managers have significant
authority, decision-making tends to be faster, which can be crucial
for time-sensitive projects.
4. Flexibility: Projectized organizations are often more adaptable to
changes in project requirements and customer demands because
resources can be quickly reassigned.
Cons:
1. Resource Conflicts: In a projectized structure, team members may be
assigned to multiple projects simultaneously, leading to resource
conflicts and overextension.
2. Higher Overhead: Maintaining separate project teams and support
functions can result in higher administrative and management costs.
3. Limited Knowledge Sharing: Knowledge sharing across projects can
be limited, as each project team operates as an independent unit.
This can lead to a lack of cross-project learning and innovation.
4. Team Disbandment: When a project is completed, project teams may
disband, which can lead to the loss of valuable knowledge and
expertise.
PROJECTIZED
Projectized Organizational Culture
Pros:
1. Innovation: A projectized culture encourages innovation as project
teams have the freedom to explore new ideas and solutions.
2. Entrepreneurship: It fosters an entrepreneurial spirit among team
members, as they take ownership of projects and have a stake in their
success.
3. Customer-Centric: Projectized cultures tend to be customer-centric,
as project teams are focused on delivering value to clients.
Cons:
1. High Stress: The constant pressure to deliver projects on time and
within budget can lead to high stress levels among team members.
2. Conflict: Conflicts can arise between project managers and
functional managers, especially when they have different priorities or
resource allocation concerns.
3. Burnout: Team members may experience burnout due to the
demands of working on multiple projects simultaneously.
4. Lack of Stability: Projectized cultures may lack stability for
employees who prefer a more structured and predictable work
environment.
MATRIX
Matrix organizational structures and cultures combine elements of both
functional and projectized structures, creating a unique approach to
project management.
Matrix Organizational Structure
Pros:
1. Resource Flexibility: Matrix structures allow for flexible resource
allocation, as employees can work on both project and functional
tasks. This versatility can be particularly valuable when dealing with
fluctuating workloads.
2. Expertise Utilization: Functional specialists can contribute their
expertise to projects while still fulfilling their functional roles,
leading to high-quality project outcomes.
3. Balanced Priorities: Matrix structures strike a balance between
functional and project priorities, ensuring that the organization's
core functions are maintained while projects are executed.
4. Enhanced Communication: Matrix structures promote better
communication between project managers and functional managers,
reducing misunderstandings and conflicts.
Cons:
1. Complexity: The dual reporting relationships in matrix structures can
be complex and confusing, making it challenging for employees to
understand their roles and responsibilities.
2. Conflict: Conflict may arise due to competing demands from both
project and functional managers, leading to tension and confusion.
3. Slow Decision-Making: The need to consult multiple managers can
slow down decision-making processes, which can be a hindrance for
time-sensitive projects.
4. Power Struggles: Power struggles between project and functional
managers can occur, leading to resistance to change and
inefficiencies.
MATRIX
Matrix organizational structures and cultures combine elements of both
functional and projectized structures, creating a unique approach to
project management.
Matrix Organizational Culture
Pros:
1. Adaptability: A matrix culture encourages adaptability, as employees
must be open to switching between project and functional roles
based on organizational needs.
2. Enhanced Collaboration: Matrix cultures promote collaboration
across functional and project teams, fostering a culture of
cooperation and cross-functional learning.
3. Empowerment: Employees often have more autonomy and decision-
making authority in a matrix culture, which can lead to increased job
satisfaction and motivation.
4. Resource Sharing: Matrix cultures promote the sharing of resources
and knowledge across projects, maximizing resource utilization.
Cons:
1. Confusion: The ambiguity of roles and reporting relationships in a
matrix culture can lead to confusion and uncertainty among
employees.
2. Conflict: The potential for conflict between project and functional
teams can be high, especially when there are disagreements about
priorities or resource allocation.
3. Stress: Employees in matrix cultures may experience higher levels of
stress due to the demands of balancing multiple roles and meeting
the expectations of multiple managers.
4. Lack of Clear Direction: Some employees may struggle to find a clear
career path or sense of direction in a matrix culture, as their roles
may change frequently.
RISK AVERSE
Being risk-averse in organizational structures and cultures for project
management can have both advantages and disadvantages.
Pros of a Risk-Averse Approach
1. Stability and Predictability: A risk-averse culture tends to prioritize
stability and predictability, which can be beneficial for organizations
dealing with sensitive or critical projects where any deviation from the
plan can have significant consequences.
2. Conservative Resource Allocation: Organizations that are risk-averse
may allocate resources conservatively, minimizing the chances of
resource shortages or overcommitment on projects.
3. Preservation of Reputation: Risk-averse cultures may prioritize
reputation management, ensuring that the organization avoids public
failures or negative outcomes that can damage its brand and trust.
4. Compliance and Regulatory Adherence: In industries with strict
regulatory requirements, a risk-averse approach cacan help ensure
compliance with regulations and standards, reducing legal and
financial risks.
RISK AVERSE
Cons of a Risk-Averse Approach
1. Innovation Stifling: A strong aversion to risk can stifle innovation and
creative problem-solving, as employees may be discouraged from
taking risks or trying new approaches.
2. Missed Opportunities: A risk-averse culture may lead to missed
opportunities for growth and competitive advantage, as the
organization may be reluctant to explore new markets or technologies.
3. Slower Decision-Making: Risk-averse organizations tend to have
slower decision-making processes, as decisions often require
extensive analysis and consensus-building to minimize perceived
risks.
4. Employee Apathy: Employees in a risk-averse culture may become
disengaged or apathetic if they feel their ideas and initiatives are
consistently met with resistance or skepticism.
5. Resistance to Change: Risk-averse organizations can be resistant to
change, which can be problematic in fast-paced industries where
adaptability and agility are critical.
6. Overcautious Approach: While mitigating risk is important, an overly
cautious approach can lead to missed growth opportunities and a lack
of competitiveness in the market.
7. Bureaucracy: The need for thorough risk assessment and approval
processes can result in increased bureaucracy, slowing down project
execution.
CUSTOMER CENTRIC CULTURE
A customer-centric culture within an organization can have both
advantages and disadvantages when it comes to project management.
Pros of a Customer-Centric Culture
1. Enhanced Customer Satisfaction: Prioritizing the customer's needs
and preferences can lead to higher customer satisfaction. This can be
particularly valuable for projects aimed at delivering products or
services to customers.
2. Clear Focus on Value: A customer-centric culture encourages teams to
focus on delivering value to the end-users, which aligns well with the
objectives of many projects.
3. Improved Product Development: Projects driven by customer insights
and feedback are more likely to result in products or services that
meet customer expectations and needs.
4. Customer Loyalty: Satisfied customers are more likely to become
loyal, repeat customers, which can benefit the organization in the long
run.
5. Market Competitiveness: Organizations with a strong customer-
centric focus are often more competitive in the market, as they are
better at identifying and responding to changing customer
preferences and trends.
6. Continuous Improvement: A customer-centric culture promotes a
culture of continuous improvement, where projects aim to iteratively
enhance products and services based on customer feedback.
CUSTOMER CENTRIC CULTURE
Cons of a Customer-Centric Culture
1. Enhanced Customer Satisfaction: Prioritizing the customer's needs
and preferences can lead to higher customer satisfaction. This can be
particularly valuable for projects aimed at delivering products or
services to customers.
2. Clear Focus on Value: A customer-centric culture encourages teams to
focus on delivering value to the end-users, which aligns well with the
objectives of many projects.
3. Improved Product Development: Projects driven by customer insights
and feedback are more likely to result in products or services that
meet customer expectations and needs.
4. Customer Loyalty: Satisfied customers are more likely to become
loyal, repeat customers, which can benefit the organization in the long
run.
5. Market Competitiveness: Organizations with a strong customer-
centric focus are often more competitive in the market, as they are
better at identifying and responding to changing customer
preferences and trends.
6. Continuous Improvement: A customer-centric culture promotes a
culture of continuous improvement, where projects aim to iteratively
enhance products and services based on customer feedback.
