riven versus non–project-driven organizations
Projects Overlap
On the micro level, virtually all organizations are either marketing-, engineering-, or manufacturing-driven. But on the macro level, organizations are either project- or non–project-driven. In a project-driven organization, such as construction or aerospace, all work is characterized through projects, with each project as a separate cost center having its own profit-and-loss statement. The total profit to the corporation is simply the summation of the profits on all projects. In a project-driven organization, everything centers around the projects.
In the non–project-driven organization, such as low-technology manufacturing, profit and loss are measured on vertical or functional lines. In this type of organization, projects exist merely to support the product lines or functional lines. Priority resources are assigned to the revenue-producing functional line activities rather than the projects.
Project management in a non–project-driven organization is generally more difficult for these reasons:
Projects may be few and far between. Not all projects have the same project management requirements, and therefore they cannot be managed identically. This difficulty results from poor understanding of project management and a reluctance of companies to invest in proper training. Executives do not have sufficient time to manage projects themselves, yet refuse to delegate authority. Projects tend to be delayed because approvals most often follow the vertical chain of command. As a result, project work stays too long in functional departments. Because project staffing is on a "local" basis, only a portion of the organization understands project management and sees the system in action. There is heavy dependence on subcontractors and outside agencies for project management expertise.
Non–project-driven organizations may also have a steady stream of projects, all of which are usually designed to enhance manufacturing operations. Some projects may be customer-requested, such as:
The introduction of statistical dimensioning concepts to improve process control The introduction of process changes to enhance the final product The introduction of process change concepts to enhance product reliability
If these changes are not identified as specific projects, the result can be:
Poorly defined responsibility areas within the organization Poor communications, both internal and external to the organization Slow implementation A lack of a cost-tracking system for implementation Poorly defined performance criteria
The below Figure shows the tip-of-the-iceberg syndrome, which can occur in all types of organizations but is most common in non–project-driven organizations. On the surface, all we see is a lack of authority for the project manager. But beneath the surface we see the causes; there is excessive meddling due to lack of understanding of project management, which, in turn, resulted from an inability to recognize the need for proper training.
In the previous sections we stated that project management could be handled on either a formal or an informal basis. As can be seen from below Figure, informal project management most often appears in non–project-driven organizations. It is doubtful that informal project management would work in a project-driven organization where the project manager has profit-and-loss responsibility.
Note: in a matrix structure, most project personnel are allocated to a project but remain under operational control of the parent department (designated by brackets). In this simple example only three (groups of) people are actually ‘controlled' by the same department that is sponsoring each of the three projects.
Table: COMPARISON OF THE FUNCTIONAL AND THE PROJECT VIEWPOINTS
Phenomena
Project Viewpoint
Functional Viewpoint
Line–staff organizational dichotomy
Vestiges of the hierarchical model remain: the line functions are placed in a support position. A web of authority and responsibility exists.
Line functions have direct responsibility for accomplishing the objectives; line commands, and staff advises.
Scalar principle
Elements of the vertical chain exist, but prime emphasis is placed on horizontal and diagonal work flow. Important business is conducted as the legitimacy of the task requires.
The chain of authority relationships is from superior to subordinate throughout the organization. Central, crucial, and important business is conducted up and down the vertical hierarchy.
Superior–subordinate relationship
Peer-to-peer, manager-to-technical expert, associate-to-associate, etc., relationships are used to conduct much of the salient business.
This is the most important relationship; if kept healthy, success will follow. All important business is conducted through a pyramiding structure of superiors and subordinates
Organizational objectives
Management of a project becomes a joint venture of many relatively independent organizations. Thus, the objective becomes multilateral.
Organizational objectives are sought by the parent unit (an assembly of suborganizations) working within its environment. The objective is unilateral.
Unity of direction
The project manager manages across functional and organizational lines to accomplish a common interorganizational objective.
The general manager acts as the one head for a group of activities having the same plan.
Parity of authority and responsibility
Considerable opportunity exists for the project manager's responsibility to exceed his authority. Support people are often responsible to other managers (functional) for pay, performance reports, promotions, etc.
Consistent with functional management; the integrity of the superior–subordinate relationship is maintained through functional authority and advisory staff services.
Time duration
The project (and hence the organization) is finite in duration.
Tends to perpetuate itself to provide continuing facilitative support.
Most people within project-driven and non–project-driven organizations have differing views of project management.
Gautam Koppala,
POME Author
GAUTAM KOPPALA, With over a decade, track record of successful leadership, excellent results through strategic skills in driving revenue and profit growth. Demonstrated ability to identify and trouble shoot critical issues impacting productivity, cost, distribution, marketing, Strategic positioning, sales and financial operations, with innate ability to build and maintain strong client relationships in operations. Expert in distilling and managing processes, enhancing internal structures, and promoting multi-skilled team competencies via nurturing mentorship and inspirational leadership. Engagements have spanned operational, strategic, technological and change management roles. Academically, I am a cum laude graduate with a Bachelor of Technology degree in Electrical and Electronics Engineering (B-Tech E.E.E.) and a post graduate in Masters in Human Resources Management (M.H.R.M.) and Masters of Foreign Trade (M.F.T.). As you will see my Post Graduation's were been studied part-time, as well as working full-time as an Engineer. I feel that this demonstrates my ability to maintain dedication, motivation and enthusiasm for a project management over a long period of time. In addition, balancing full-time work with study has perfected my time-management and organizational skills. I believe that my college degrees and gamut certifications in combination with my extensive broad-based work experience along with my drive, resourcefulness and determination, would make me an excellent candidate for a senior management position with any company. Highlights of my background include Operations related Commercial, Supply chain, Sales with a magnificent experience in Project management, technically oriented towards Automation and Security Systems in Industrial and Building sectors. Presently, writing a book on Projects and Operations Management (comprise of 12 volumes, 6K pages), and awaited for the reputed publications. These books can be checked in Google books and other search engines too.
