2.3.6 'Horses for courses'
Different team structures have different advantages and disadvantages. A structure may fit a particular task in one organisation better than another. On the next page, Table 1 sets out the strengths and weaknesses of different team structures.
| Strengths | Weaknesses | |
|---|---|---|
| Functional | Lowest administration costs Reasonably successful in past | Coordination across functional areas is more difficult |
| Reasonably successful in past | Inflexible | |
| Pools technical and professional expertise | Communication across functional areas is more difficult | |
| Handles routine work well | Long, slow chain of command | |
| Allows training and apprenticeship in departments | Possibly poor communication with client | |
| Line management has control of projects and change | Tends to push decision making upwards | |
| Easy to set up and terminate projects | Novel objectives difficult to achieve | |
| Limits career development outside recognised paths for staff members | ||
| Tends to dampen creative initiatives | ||
| Matrix | Acceptable to 'traditional' managers | Dual reporting lines of project staff |
| Retains functional strengths and control of paperwork | Staff appraisal and performance measurement difficult | |
| Some planning power in project team | Can cause conflicts of priorities for staff | |
| Faster start-ups | Wider skills required of project manager (e.g. teambuilding more difficult) | |
| Top management retains control of projects but relieved of day-to-day decisions | Project manager may not be able to influence who is assigned to the project | |
| Flexibility of personnel assigned | Dilutes the resources available from functional areas | |
| Reasonable interface with clients and customers is possible | ||
| Some teambuilding is possible | ||
| Project | Greater authority and control | High administrative costs |
| Team members contribute to, and share, objectives | Project manager involved in more administration | |
| Teambuilding and communication made easier | Difficult to graft on to established organisations | |
| Quicker decisions | Project more difficult to terminate | |
| Fewer political problems Good client contacts | Project staff may feel a lack of job security | |
| Good client contacts | Project staff may feel let down on return to functional job | |
| High degree of management skills development | Project staff may feel they have undefined career paths | |
| Easier for top management to coordinate and influence | Slow to mobilise | |
| Can give career development/change for team members | Often limited number of good project staff available | |
| Builds synergy in team | ||
| Clear responsibilities, can be profit centres |